Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #464 - Freedom Convoy Truckers Have WON, Tow Companies Side With Movement w/Will Chamberlain

Episode Date: February 9, 2022

Tim, Ian, Seamus of FreedomToons, and Lydia host Will Chamberlain of the Internet Accountability Project to break down the removal of the Freedom Convoy and the problems the Canadian government is facing with tow trucks, Alberta's choice to ditch their vaccine mandate in response to the trucker convoy, a GOP representative who claims the Capital police broke into his office in disguise and took photos of classified documents, and the other GOP rep who fears a second civil war is incoming. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The truckers in Canada have all but one base. They've won. And I'll tell you why. They haven't necessarily gotten everything they've wanted, but the government seems to be cracking. Trudeau seems to be breaking. There's reports now that many of the Vax passports, the Vax mandates are going to be lifted. The government has talked about removing many of these mandates, not because of the truckers, by the way, but they've won for one very simple reason. It is now confirmed from city officials, tow truck companies have refused to intervene to move any of these big rigs. They have outright said, we work with these guys. We're not going to intervene. And the government responded by these tow truck companies won't be an obstacle to us ending this protest, which means what they're going to seize the tow

trucks and force them to do it. It ain't going to happen. Not only that, some of these heavy duty towing companies said, listen, unless the truckers agree to be moved, it's impossible to move these trucks. The city is shut down until the truckers decide. So that means as far as I'm concerned, they control the city. And there's about an estimate of 500 or so trucks gridlocking the city. And there's tens of thousands of more truckers who are actively protesting in many other places. The government has one choice. Comply with the protesters.

And the protesters aren't asking for anything material. They're not asking for money. They're not asking for buildings. They're simply saying, revert your decrees. The truckers aren't saying we want. They're saying, stop doing the bad stuff you've done by decree. That's honorable. We had a bunch of other news as well, though.

There is a Republican congressman who's claimed the Capitol Police special investigators dressed like construction workers broke into his office, photographed protected materials and interrogated a staffer. These are dark days. The same day we're hearing this, Louie Gohmert said that the DOJ is spying on mail from his constituents to him. It's getting crazy out there. And then on a more funny note, I guess Donald Trump has weighed in on the Joe Rogan controversy, offering Joe some good advice, saying, stand strong, don't be weak, and don't apologize. Meanwhile, Neil Young has doubled down. He said it wasn't about censorship. He said it was about, you know, he doesn't want to associate with Spotify, except even after he's won, apparently, and got his music removed, he's calling on Spotify employees to quit their jobs,

because it is about censorship. So we'll talk about all of those things. Joining us today is Will Chamberlain. Yeah, Senior Counsel at the Internet Accountability Project and the Article 3 Project, fighting big tech censorship and things like that. But really, the last six weeks have been I've been in the newborn haze. My lovely little Elizabeth was born on December 30th. Congratulations. That's awesome. Jordan is at home taking care of her and hopefully watching. And I'm happy to be here. I'm happy to be back and joining the world of the living. So your credentials is dead.

Yeah, that's right. My credentials is dead. Will Chamberlain is joining the show. He is dead. And thanks for joining. It should be fun. We got Seamus. Seamus Coghlan.

I run a YouTube channel called Freedom Tunes. We upload political cartoons every single Thursday, sometimes on Tuesday as well. And we uploaded one today, as a matter of fact. Tim voiced Fauci, and it was about the Joe Rogan controversy, if you all want to check that out. I'm excited to be back and excited to have Will on. We've done a couple shows before, usually really interesting. And your title is Father. Father Seamus Coughlin. No, absolutely not. First of all, that is stolen valor. Absolutely not. I love you, Seamus. I'm Ian Crossland. What's up, everybody? I'm not a dad yet, but hopefully one day.

That's my plan. And so I'm excited to have a baby one of these days. And Will, thanks for doing it. And then, yeah, yeah, I'm really planning on having a baby pretty soon. So I'm really excited about that. Oh, excellent. Yeah, excellent. You guys can follow me at iancrossland.net, but let's get this show going.

Yes, I'm very excited to be here as well. Thank you all for tuning in this evening. Always good to have Will's legal counsel, or not legal counsel, I'm told, and I'm excited to talk. Let's get going. Before we get started, my friends, head over to TimCast.com and become a member because we are primarily supported through memberships on the website. That's how we fund everything.

And in the event we ever face any kind of real censorship, that's where we're going to have everything. So your membership is a protective barrier from the censorship and, you know, the activist attacks and all of that stuff. So it's really appreciated. But as a member, you'll get access to exclusive members-only segments from this show.

We will have one for you tonight around 11 or so p.m. That will be at timcast.com. So sign up there support our journalists but don't forget like this video right now smash honk that like button one like is one right honk it honk give it a hand a good honk and share the video sharing really really helps subscribe let's jump into that first story this is incredible so we've heard rumors there was local reporting from independent outlets that

they called tow companies and the companies are like, look, we're not getting involved in this. We don't want to tow these trucks because we work with them and things like that. But now we have the CBC and the government acknowledging towing companies on city contracts even are refusing to move convoy vehicles. You're going to love this. Look at this. According to Canelicos, Mayor Jim Watson has reached out to his counterparts and other Ontario municipalities, but no dice. No one wants to help right now. The consensus seems to be that many of them or most of them don't want to do the work

because they rely on the heavy truck industry for their livelihood and they don't want to damage that part of their business. That's the position they're taking at least. Deputy Police Chief Steve Bell agreed that finding companies that will agree to tow protesters has been a challenge in, quote, every jurisdiction that's faced this, and it's forcing us to come up with some creative solutions. He wouldn't elaborate on what those creative solutions might be, but said police are coming, quote, toward a position where we're not going to let the tow truck operators be an obstacle to ending what's occurring.

I just want you to think about that last quote for one quick second. What does that mean? They're an obstacle. You've gone to a private company and said, I require your service. And they said, good day, sir. And you said, you are now an obstacle to me ending a protest. What are they going to do? Steal the tow trucks and operate them themselves?

They're not going to know how to do it. Could you imagine some cop being like, let me just figure this thing out. I think I can get it. They'd have to steal the vehicles, commandeer these companies, because the companies won't do it. It's very difficult to tow trucks when the tow trucks won't tow trucks. Exactly. Well, there's also a quote from

a local trucker who laughed at the prospect when someone asked him, are you worried about getting towed? And he said, anybody who's worked with these big rigs knows that when you activate the air brakes, these things cannot move unless the operator wants them to move. So the tow truck drivers are like,

that's one of the other stories we have. They're basically saying removing trucks, well, they're literally saying would be almost impossible. It's a gridlock. Think about it this way too. You've got, you know, let's say you have four by four trucks in the road. How are you going to be able to tow one of the trucks one at a time and try and clear it out? It's insane. They're heavy duty. The companies won't do it. And even if they could, these trucks have basically gridlocked the area. There's smaller cars. I'll say this, physically possible, logistically impossible. Moving all these cars to get to the trucks and then clear everything out, it's never going to happen.

Yeah, not without the cooperation of the tow truck companies who can give you the expertise necessary, not without some amount of meaningful coercion that you can enforce. I mean, think about if you had an individual tow truck or an individual trucker who was pulling a stunt like this. Okay, you could probably figure out how to do it. If you find one tow truck, you could be like, also, we're going to throw you in jail for a long time unless you help us. The longer you wait, the worse it'll be for you um but when when you've got like a mass protest like this where the tow trucks are you know it's just they're in an impossible situation yeah well one of the things i love so much about this is that there have been so many instances in this country of specific special interest groups

with a lot of money and power who are very cunning trying to resist specific policies and not being able to and then you have these truckers who band together and no one can do anything about it. It's really incredible. Well, the crazy thing is the solidarity, I guess. It's that the truckers took action and the tow truck drivers are like, nah, nah, we work with these guys. We're not getting involved. They can offer up the cops, everything in the world. Apparently, Ottawa police are exempt from the vaccine mandates. They give them special privileges and the cops with a smile on their face put the boot on your neck but when it comes to the industry of truckers too many people rely on them imagine it this way too it's not just tow truck drivers there's probably a supermarket and the cops are

going to be like don't you provide service to these truckers they're going to be like i don't want to get involved because if i start making these guys angry they don't deliver to my store anymore. I got to work with these guys, man. If the truckers boycott a grocery store chain, that chain's in trouble. No, well, that's what I'm saying. That's what I love about this so much is that it has to be unbelievably frustrating to them because the government has been able to push around literally everybody. And you look at all the incredibly powerful people who cower at the face of policies and try to resist them but are unable.

And then you just have truckers banding together and people standing in solidarity with them. And the political class is unable to do anything about it. It's kind of like an immune system. Like it's a natural emergence of the system. It rises up and defends itself. It wipes out any kind of ill. That's what it seems like. It seems like, well, the truckers are like the red blood cells of the body,

but now these truckers are acting like white blood cells, weeding out a dangerous corruption. Macrophages. I guess what I'm really trying to say here is there's an incredibly valuable lesson in all of this because it wasn't a think tank uh it wasn't a political interest organization it wasn't any group of intellectuals that banded together to resist this policy and push back against it like it was literally just ordinary people it's like a snooty rich kid on

the playground who's bullying people because he's allowed to do whatever he wants and then there's some just like regular working class kid who minds his own business. And everyone's always getting picked on by the snooty rich kid. And then everyone's just like, I wish you would stop. And then one day the regular kid who's just like, he just gets up and he's a bigger dude and he just shoves the snooty little kid to the ground. He's like, you can't do that. Don't you know I am?

And he goes, shut up. It's just like you finally push the quiet guy. He's had enough of your BS and there's nothing you can do except comply. Just comply. Is it so hard? You can go back to normal if you just comply. Well, I think Justin Trudeau was saying that the only way to get – oh, I've got to get his quote.

The only way to stop removing our rights is to remove some more rights really quick. I don't know what he's saying. That's what they always say. And I'd be a little sympathetic to the left on this if they hadn't spent two years justifying every type of lawless disturbance and riot over their own pet causes. You know, as a general matter,

I want to be in a position where I'm saying, no, riots are bad, obey the law, whatever. But I'm sorry, you guys spent two years blocking traffic over, you know, Extinction Rebellion and Justin Trudeau rooting it on and all this nonsense and i'm like take some of your own medicine the the riot so i'm not i'm not familiar how bad riots got in canada if at all i don't know i don't pay attention to canada all that much to be honest a little bit and this story is particularly big so you know we are we are seeing seeing it with as it goes to the cultural left.

You know, these guys are engaging in possibly the most peaceful protest you could ever engage in. The roads are shut down. There's no risk to someone getting run over. Remember when BLM went in the highway and we're like dancing around in the car, like swerved and hit people like as dangerous. They've shut down downtown streets. So there's no traffic. It's way safer. It doesn't – isn't, like, false imprisonment the way that sort of standing in traffic to, like, block just average everyday people is?

They've not taken any police stations like in Chaz. They're not riots. These are protests. They're not attacking cars. There's a bit of a private nuisance. So I don't know if you guys are familiar with nuisance law. So nuisance can take any number of forms. Like say you have a plant that's putting out nasty chemicals into the air.

The people who live around you have a claim in tort for nuisance, right? You're not allowed. If you're damaging everybody around you's property, then that's a nuisance. And nuisance can be noise too, right? Like obnoxious noise pollution in the middle of the night is not lawful in general. So like I get, you know, I get, again, so I get a little bit of where they're coming from, but I'm just under the circumstances in Canada. Sorry, no, you get to deal with this until you repeal the mandates because you decided to let your people run wild, do way worse things. I'm fine with nonviolent civil disobedience that breaks laws. When Extinction Rebellion blocked the roads, that boat in DC, I think it was,

I said, hey, you know what? More power to them. Honestly, they're going to have to come in. They're going to have to remove those, the boat. They're going to have to arrest everybody. The people will get arrested. They will get charged. It's not the most egregious charge they'll ever face in the world, but they didn't get violent. They made their point and they got arrested for it. That's kind of like the middle ground where we're like, well, we don't want people to always be doing things like this, but we tolerate a certain degree of civil disobedience when people want to get their voice heard. Truckers are doing just that. I'll defend that all the same. But when BLN and Antifa go around smashing windows and burning buildings down, nobody agrees with that. You've gone so far over the line. We're like, dude, stop. You're crazy.

You're crazy people. Yeah. It's contextual. if there was a purpose for that like in a war scenario you do do that to preserve yourself you have to like fight but the context didn't seem right for the riots it seemed out of context and this does seem in context in canada and it's also specific to a very narrow ask i think that's another reason it's substantially more virtuous right like black lives matter what are they asking for like end systemic racism what does that even mean and how do you how do you verify it's done how to you know it's just like an endless ask for whatever words these guys are like repealed this executive order right we'll go home the moment you do and they're not asking for a gain right so so blm people are like we have a list of demands of things you have to give us the truckers are like you did something

we didn't like and we're asking you to stop. They're not even asking you for anything, dude. They're like, you did thing, stop doing thing. The truckers are coming from a negative position and trying to return to zero, whereas BLM was starting from zero and trying to jump up in other positions. Now, don't get me wrong.

Police brutality is bad and protesting police brutality is a good thing. Those people who are protesting police brutality are coming from a negative, and they're saying we want to go back to zero where we have a right to live peacefully and have our rights respected. But when BLM comes out and says we want funding for this program in Louisville, they demanded a cut of local business revenue. I'm like that's mafia. Exactly. That's the incentive. And they went to a Cuban restaurant, and they smashed a potted plant like give us what we want he was like no and they

smashed a pot it's like dude that's like mafia behavior so let me just stress when i see blm marching down the street and they're doing their communist fists and all that i'm like i really disagree with them but i understand if it's a peaceful protest if it's non-violence of disobedience and more power to you, man. We got to tolerate some degree of civil unrest, but we have a hard line. We have a soft line and a hard line. With these truckers, they're just basically like stop ruling by decree. It violates the law.

Please stop breaking the law. I'm okay with all of it. Yeah, absolutely. Well, we were even talking about this the other day with J.B. Pritzker giving $300,000 of federal COVID relief money to BLM. And one thing I said at that point was BLM is the perfect scam because there aren't any actual results you have to show for it. systemic racism and we want this change and that change but it's never anything really concrete whereas these truckers are again they're asking for something very solid they're saying repeal this law don't force me to take an injection that i don't want and on top of it they're not starting this massive trucker organization called like trucker lives matter where they're asking for millions and dollars millions of dollars and getting funding from state authorities and then spending it on mansions we'll see yeah we will, we will see. To be fair, it remains to be seen.

Might be a missed opportunity. I would be, yeah, yeah. Nope, they'll be buying posts. No, no, hold on, look, look. End systemic anti-truck discrimination. Exactly. I don't have a problem with the function of Black Lives Matter starting a global organization

and raising money. I have a problem with authoritarianism. I have a problem with the authoritarian application of their ideologies. I have a personal disagreement with their ideologies that should be debated, but their tactics don't allow for reasonable debate, so they're playing an unreasonable game with an unreasonable ideology. I don't care if any organization wants to raise money. If the truckers launch the Truckers for Freedom or whatever and they end up raising $60 million,

that's fantastic. If Truckers for Freedom raises $60 million and it turns out their address is fake and there's no leader and no one knows where the money is, I'm going to have a problem with that. No, exactly. I have zero problem with global organizations trying to raise money. I'm Catholic. But when you look at BLM

specifically, if you look at BLM specifically, it's not the fact they're trying to raise money. It's, again, they're trying to raise money for Nebula's goals. And at the end of the day, they don't have to show any results. That's what's so frightening about it. There's literally nothing that the money actually goes towards other than we want to hire a diversity officer here or we want to give a payout to this group well to be fair that that louisville group specifically would have to net 15 of the local businesses revenue to show results because that's what they were going for so at least as evil as their plan was it was tangible you know

they're like guys guys were raising money to shake down local businesses for a cut of their revenue yeah well go towards our ideology and i again i was being i was being like a little tongue-in-cheek about the cath Catholic thing earlier. But no, I mean, the Catholic Church is one of the number one charitable givers. I think you can have an organization that raises a lot of money and is global that does good. And if BLM did good, I would have zero problem with what they were doing. But they want to destroy the family, and they're trying to usher in socialism. And there's a lot of intricacies woven with the U.S. government and BLM.

Although I'm looking into it now just to find some examples i've just seen a lot of like indoctrinations into the government and the military and stuff so that that's fascism when you see a corporation start to raise a bunch of money and then get the government to start working with them like that's agree fascism isn't always dangerous it's not always it's not always violent fascism it can be very peaceful well let's let's yes it. When you have hardcore cultural enforcement, then everyone's scared to do anything. And if everyone is living under a boot, you won't need to crack a whip.

You know what I mean? Exactly. Well, and this is the thing. We talk about peace and unity, but none of those things can come at the expense of truth. Sometimes you just, you have to fight. You have to resist. The reason why I think ultimately though,

fascism and authoritarianism can never be peaceful is because of resistance. Because I don't see, you know, what the communists have always wanted to do and always tried always result in mass violence and civil unrest, and they have to kill their own people for it. But that's why it's like, fundamentally, you can say, this is what the communists and the authoritarians believe. If you can subjugate everybody, then you won't have to worry about violence. You're throwing gulags, right? They're gone. It just never works out that way.

The U.S. did it with money, with the banking system, 1913 or so. We've basically been living in peaceful fascism for 107 years, 108 years or something. That's an aggressive claim. Yeah, I disagree. Federal Reserve fascists is F. Go at it. I want to hear this. I want to hear this debate.

I mean I think fractional reserve banking is good. I think the alternative is a world where wages can't – I mean, the problem where wages go down nominally, which wages don't, that's not very friendly to the economy in general. I mean, like, we've tried gold standard a number of times. The big problem that happens is if you have any sort of economic downturn, at least just mass unemployment rather than shifting exchange rates. I mean, I can't go into more detail.

But fractional reserve banking is – I don't see – that seems non sequitur. So fractional – I mean – I understand. What I'm saying is I don't see how fractional reserve banking is – look, you change interest rates. You have policy decisions. You have quantitative easing. You have the borrowing and the printing of money and bonds and selling that stuff. You don't need fractional reserve banking to accomplish those things.

I mean, fractional reserve banking, I guess, is one mechanism to have a money supply that is ultimately expandable. I think it's a good thing to have the ability to expand the money supply because I think Not that way. I mean, you can think about the key ways to do it, but the sort of, because the thing you know, because the thing is I used to be a libertarian and a hardcore woman, like, into the gold standard, read a lot about it, and eventually just came to the conclusion that that was actually a bad idea. Because, you know, I think the best understanding of, like, why is a gold standard just grew up in, like, a modern example of it is the euro, right? Like, we talk about the euro being really messed up and sort of fundamentally huge problems as a result in southern European countries, right? Like we talk about the Euro being really messed up and sort of fundamentally huge problems as a result in Southern European countries, right?

Greece, Italy, Spain, always having huge employment issues, right? Huge, like, and their economies are just in a mess consistently. Well, why is that? Okay, well, the problem is they're all in, they're sharing a single currency with a bunch of countries, including Germany,

which is a really powerful, efficient economy, way more powerful and efficient than the Southern European countries. Now, prior to the advent of the Euro, how did the higher economic productivity of Germany manifest itself? Well, it manifested itself in the German currency was worth more because they produced so many goods and services you could buy with Deutsche Marks. And the Spanish currencies were those currencies depreciated in the other countries, which meant that the currencies depreciated themselves. So ultimately their ability to purchase exports went down,

but their nominal wages, the actual dollar amounts they were getting paid, or sorry, the peseta. You mean imports? The peseta, no, I'm talking about like, there's a nominal and real. Do you guys understand the distinction between those two, like nominal wages and real wages?

So you keep getting five bucks, that's the nominal wage. But the real wage is your $5 is going to buy you less goods. Exactly. Okay. And basically, my overall thesis is it is very bad when nominal wages have to go down. Because no one likes to go home to their wife and explain why their pay went down. Right?

Like that's a really good way to get, you know, so you get fewer people being hired. It's like nominal wages are what's called called sticky downwards people really hate when they do that and so if the productivity differential between regions can manifest itself as um your currency depreciates versus basically like all your people's nominal wages have to go down because otherwise like everybody you go broke like if you can't print's nominal wages have to go down because otherwise everybody, you go broke. If you can't print money, then you have to borrow. It's kind of complicated. It's really, really complicated to explain to a lot of people, even to give people the basics on fractional reserve banking policies.

Can you break down fractional reserve? No, no, no, no, no. In 13 seconds. I think we got to – It's pretty basic. It's like you can loan out money that you don't have. Yeah. You only have 10% of what you're loaning out on basic. It's like you can loan out money that you don't have. Yeah. It's not just that.

It's that loans create money. A loan isn't someone lending – a bank is not lending money to you. A bank is creating the money on demand for when someone – So it used to be they could only loan out what they had in gold, and now they can loan out more than what they have. Nothing is like – Can I just ask one question? But what happens if nominal wages decrease, but you actually have deflation, so real wages are increasing? I mean, if you end up having deflation, you still have that fundamental problem of people... Because it's a psychological

problem as much as it is an economic one, right? People still have to go back to their spouses and explain why their wages went down. So employers are still so reluctant to cut pay, which means they end up firing people and hiring less. And so you get this sort of unemployment gap. I mean, if you want to look at, I think the best example of gold standard being kind of screwed up is like Britain in the 1920s, where they literally had a straight up mutiny because of wage cuts. And like british navy never mutinies but they had massive problems and winston churchill who was like super gung-ho on the gold standard thought bought all the arguments about it flipped himself and was like but but but ultimately the problem is

centralization of authority and the manipulation of the economy and the manipulation of of these these these groups i i i hear what you're saying for sure but but I don't think the current system we have is the right system. I think it's ultimately authoritarian and manipulative. It's effectively a way to control different sectors of the economy and for authoritarians to exert. It's like you're saying you've got a mutiny. You've got people who are upset over their pay. I know the answer. Let's trick them into thinking they have money.

I mean – And that's kind of what happened during the pandemic, right? Now we have inflation occurring. Everything's more expensive. The supply chain is broken down. I look at these Reddit posts. There was one where a woman says it went viral. She was like, I go to the grocery store and I buy the same thing every week and I'm spending

more and more money every single week. And when I tell people, no one listens, no one believes me. I thought it was interesting because it shows how for people who are on fixed incomes or for people who buy the same things every single week, like they know what they need, milk, bread, eggs, coffee. They're seeing directly like, wow, this was 60 bucks last week and now it's 70 bucks. But for a lot of people, they kind of go and they buy random things. They go to the store and they're like, this looks nice.

So they're not actually seeing it because the number is always different. So I go to the grocery store and I ask the people working there and they're like, dude, it's nuts. The prices are skyrocketing. So for a lot of people, they're just oblivious. I suppose that's one way to control the masses. They don't realize their buying power is decreased. We printed money. We borrowed money. We went nuts. We changed savings accounts, checking accounts over the pandemic. And we gave everybody all of this money for a variety of reasons. And they all were like, wow, I got $200.

And now it's like, you can't buy anything without $200. So does it really matter? And neither can I. Thanks, guys. Yeah, exactly. Those of us who are responsible and think ahead are now the ones getting screwed over. But I'll tell you this. You can still buy silver.

So if you're someone who knows they're devaluing currency to trick people into thinking they have money, hedge your bets, I guess. But I'm not going to tell you where to hedge them. Silver's increased a little bit, though, hasn't it? Is it undervalued right now? It was flowing at $18 for a while. I'll check what it's at now. I mean, if you actually –

I think it's undervalued. I have a thesis I'll give to people, which is that if you really want – you know, the best inflation hedge is just equity in a good company. And I'll give to people, which is that if you really want the best inflation hedge, it's just equity and a good company. And I'll explain why. Do you think Apple's ever going to shy away from raising prices if costs go up on the supply side? No. The iPhone can go up in price. People will still buy iPhones, which means they will always be able to make a substantial profit regardless of how much inflation there is,

which means the value of their equity is a good inflation hedge. So this is actually the secret that a lot of people make money on. By the way, Tim, not financial advice. Are we required to say that? No, that's not financial advice. Or with what silver. Okay, fair enough, fair enough. I'm just saying my personal opinion is that silver is way undervalued.

Oh, silver is amazing. I'm just saying my personal opinion is that silver is way undervalued. Oh, silver is amazing. That's your thing. I was just curious. So you said investing in a good – having equity in a good company, but then you mentioned Apple who has slave labor. So like good, ethically good. I'm not using a good in a normative term. I'm trying to talk about – it's like the Warren Buffett style thing where it's like a company that has a good moat, right? Like a serious durable competitive advantage.

The problem with this system, one of them in my opinion, is that it allows people to artificially increase the value of their investments as opposed to actually just doing labor to provide for their community. So I think about how – I saw one post. There's a lot of these like anti-work subreddits, work reform, late-stage capitalism. And they have ridiculous solutions and proposals, but they're complaints, I understand. One was they said, my parents bought a house in the early 90s for $100,000, and now it's worth $750,000 or $800,000. I make more than they did in buying power, but I can't even afford any house, and rent is higher than the mortgage was. So I view all of this as a problem of artificially trying to control economies.

I think the market would solve for a lot of these problems if it was allowed to, but we manipulate it to try and keep things at a steady growth, even if we're forcing it and twisting it and lying to people to convince them they have money when they really don't. Yeah, well, and this is also one of the reasons I've always argued in favor of subsidiarity. I understand that it's really difficult to break a system apart once it's as large as ours, but it's not so much the idea of a command economy, which again, I am against in principle as well, but also a command economy attempting to lord over the economic decision making of 330 million people. Dude, it's a sort of, it's a type a command economy attempting to lord over the economic decision-making of 330 million people. Dude, it's a sort of,

it's a type of command economy, the Federal Reserve, deciding when they get to print more money. That should just happen when we need it. It shouldn't be up to a bunch of capital,

like bureaucrats. But it's not so much about their printing money. Money supply is created upon loan demand. So you go to a bank, you take out a loan, and then they're like,

we've just created $100,000, have a nice day. What's this, quantitative easing? That just means money printing, right? Right, right, right. and then they're like, we've just created $100,000. Have a nice day. What's this, quantitative easing? That just means money printing, right? Right, right, right. So there is money printing, but I just mean money supply is generally expanded through fractional reserve policies of creating money on demand.

When you were saying that the market will correct for itself, are you suggesting that in Italy, what was happening was the correction is that wages will go down? Right. Because basically, they're effectively on a gold standard, right? They can't print more euros, or they can only print a very limited amount because they're in this treaty agreement with the other European countries. And because of that, it's like, well, as a result, guess what? Germany is a much more productive economy than Italy. But that's because they can control the production of the currency, right?

No, it's not really just that. I mean, Germany just has, like, better companies, you know, than Italy and a more, like, it's just a more productive economy. Germany does effectively what the U.S. does for the rest of the world, right? The U.S. prints and controls the creation of the petrodollar, which allows Americans to be very, very wealthy and producing very, very little. We're backed up by, you know by U.S. imperialism. Sure, but I mean, Germany was more productive than the southern European countries in the 70s and 80s.

No, no, for sure, for sure. And the U.S. is productive. We do produce a lot, especially under Trump. We were energy independent. But it's really easy for the U.S. to, say, secure oil because oil is sold in dollars and we make them. So when Germany controls the production of euro and these other countries can't then it's really easy for them to control the rest of these

kind of but i mean again the euro is sort of it's controlled by the european central bank which germany has influence over but it's not nearly the kind of influence that say our government would have over the federal reserve for sure oh it's even more fascist like yeah no it's like it's just completely you know it's like a combined agreement. So a corporation. But basically, like, that Euro, I mean, you can't look at the Euro experiment and be like, man, that really worked out well, right? Like, for those countries. You can't say that about...

So I have a friend in Spain. I went to Spain, like, 10 years ago. And this was back when the big protest movement was happening. I think it was called, like, the March or whatever. And these students were protesting because unemployment was, like like 50% for young people. It was insane. And I said, how did this happen? What happened? And my friend told me before the euro, when they're on the peseta, a newspaper would cost, say, one peseta. So you're working your normal job. You get paid. Hey, one peseta. You buy a piece of a newspaper.

You come home. You read it. You buy food. One day, they switched to the euro. The euro was three times the value of the peseta. But guess what? The prices were normalized. So the newspaper now was still one euro, which was effectively three times what they were used to paying. And it caused mass disruption in their economy. It was extremely detrimental. There's a real benefit to local currencies

because the money can't leave the area. So there's been a lot of experimentation with local currencies. Like there was famously the Ithaca Hour, which they don't really use that much anymore. I guess the guy who was running it left or died. I'm not entirely sure. But with a local currency, you can have, let's say you have a small town and your town has its own currency. That currency can't leave leave the town so that money will always be circulating in trade making it a sort of a lubricant for society to move the machine parts to move around you could have it where you go to a city oh yeah when when you don't have a local currency and you have say like detroit which is primarily funded by one big auto manufacturing plant.

And those U.S. dollars come in. The plant then leaves. And there's no more influx of cash. And those people who live there are spending dollars outside their community. The money leaves. The trade halts. And then you end up with despair and economic downturn. Local currencies can help prevent that.

Yeah, if you could go city to city and every time you, your card in Dubuque, Iowa, it's going to automatically translate your currency into their local currency and then pay them in their local currency. And then when you leave the city and you go downtown to another city, you swipe your card and it automatically translates your currency to their currency. There may be a value to that. We're heading towards a global currency. It's probably going to be some kind of crypto. We need infinite currency. i don't think so i think i would say the

opposite um if anything like the you know the history of the euro suggests that you're more likely to see disintegration of currencies um at my my basic thesis about all this stuff in the united states is like well why then you know should we have like a good question right should we have localized currencies in individual states and i think really what you're trying to get to is you want the unit unification of like political authority and the currency area right because that way like the political authority can ensure that where there are those dislocations they are resolved internally within the country one of the ways you can kind of think of like say all those military bases we have in areas that are not like super economically productive otherwise is there a form of redistribution from more economically productive areas to less to remediate the sort of problems

you would see, which you wouldn't, and you can't resolve them in Europe because Germany's not going to pay for Italy's regional development. You could do a currency that's inside of a currency that's inside of a currency. So you could have your local currency that's inside of a state currency that's inside of your national currency that's inside of your national currency that's inside of the global currency, and it could all be used in different areas in different ways. So there's still... It's an abstract concept, but let's...

Let's get back to talking about the truckers. Because, boy, did we derail on that one. Thanks, buddy. Sorry, my bad. No, no, I told you guys to go at it. I encouraged that. That's why I said no to explaining the Federal Reserve. I'm like, this would take way too long. It struck me in my mind that fascism can be peaceful.

That's a terrifying concept. We got good news, everybody. We got good news from CTV. Alberta ditches proof of vaccine program at midnight. Masking for students on Monday. This story, February 8th, 727 p.m. Eastern Time. This is happening right now. Alberta's highly controversial proof of vaccination system expires as the clock strikes midnight Wednesday. Premier Jason Kenney announced Tuesday he made accusations that he was

playing politics with public health measures. Rules that require students to wear masks in Alberta schools will end on Monday, and children under 12 won't have to wear masks anywhere starting then. Credit goes to the truckers. I don't care what they say. I don't care about the lies. They were never going to give up power. Now we're hearing even in the US, Democrats are likely to give up on the mandates. And what are they saying? Oh, but the science has changed. No, no. A bunch of truckers crippled the capital of Canada and they all saw that happen. They all saw how powerless they were. They all heard that truckers were planning on doing it here in the U.S.

They all saw the polling, and they said, we should back down on this one. Science changed its mind. That's what happened here. The honks were loud. The science has changed. Pray I don't change it. The science didn't change, right? The only respect in which you can make that argument in good faith is saying that the Omicron is a lot less virulent than, you know, and also morbid, I guess would be the right word, than it was the OG virus that was coming out in like March 2020 or whatever.

Like that's a valid argument, right? The way the proper public health response to Omicron is very different, I think, than the proper public health response to the original virus. And it was so unknown in the beginning that they over, not over, they reacted very extremely because they didn't know. Which is also rational because it's a precautionary. And because like you were saying, it's hard to undo a process once it's going. Yes. It was kind of like you see like stores that are selling masks and stuff.

Well, and also all of the decision-making power was in the hands of people who wouldn't pay a price for overreacting. And so you were going to get an overreaction. It's also where polling was. I mean, if you look at polling is flipped, right? If you actually look, you remember looking at those polls in like March, April 2020, they were like 80-20 in favor of severe restrictions. And that's flipped completely, right?

So now 20, 80-20 the other way. Let me read this portion of the CTV news article. They say, the premier, Kenny, recently said that a plan to remove restrictions would likely come by the end of March. Five days later, he changed the timeline when he said he hoped to relax measures this month. Last Thursday, a United Conservative Party statement said the premier will begin lifting restrictions within days. Now, what could have happened that would make him just abruptly change his mind and move the timeline by almost two months? Could it be Ottawa was shut down and they were helpless?

The free people of the world have spoke. The political power we've discovered here means that leftists are going to try to infiltrate trucking. You're going to start seeing PSAs about how trucking is not a safe space and we need diversity and inclusion training within it. It won't work because trucking is you by yourself and your rig. I'm telling you they're going to do this. It's going to get automated. They can't leave anything that has any value or power

alone. They're going to automate it and then they're going to try and control the trucks. I think that's also a possibility. That's what they're going to do. They're going to be like, hey, Ottawa, you don't want to take the mask. The food's not coming to your area because we control all the shipping. Think about how awesome that will be then. Yours is much funnier. It's 20 years and then all of a sudden one day, all automatic vehicles, trucks, and cars gridlock DC.

And then they're like, how is this happening? It's a Chinese hack. No, it's like Jeff Bezos, who bought the companies, holds the phone, and he's like, ha, ha, ha. No, dude. No, it's some, like, 13-year-old. It's some 13-year-old who made a bunch of money off of that era's version of bitcoin and he's just purchased up all the trucks you buy the company that controls them right so when they automate trucks it's going to be a trucking company with no drivers who just owns a fleet of trucks that is terrifying and then it's going to be one ceo being like i can't believe

they would pass this law restricting my business beep and then all the trucks i guess the issue i don't think we can get self-driving trucks. I just realized that. Because you know what's going to happen if anybody ever tries to do self-driving trucks? This. Yeah. The trucker convoy.

Oh, right. They think they'll protest? They've landed on a protest that they found out really works quite well. It's true. And so they'll just repurpose it. I wouldn't support that protest. I think automation's inevitable.

It's kind of like the horseback riders protesting the car. Ian, I don't think you get it. It doesn't matter if you support it. Oh, right. It doesn't matter if you support it. They're going to win. They're going to win. The thing about Bezos or any one billionaire owning all the trucks is that the reason they would never be able to do that is because if they did press the button and have all the trucks gridlocked DC, they'd be arrested in two seconds.

They'd have agents at their house they'd grab the phone they'd change it they'd control it but the other scenario is in 30 or 40 years the trucks all of a sudden one day gridlock dc and there's the you know bezos runs out he's like it's not me i don't have control of this and then there's there's the real scenario in the fun scenario the real scenario is China or some nefarious actor takes control. Like an artificial intelligence, a rogue artificial intelligence. I was literally talking about our political rivals hacking our system. Well, you're talking about the truck.

I don't know what you're talking about. He's like, they became self-aware. The other possibility I thought is one of the trucks stands up into Optimus Prime. Skynet won't nuke everything. That's far too simple. Okay. Stop. stands up into Optimus Prime. SkyNet won't nuke everything. That's far too simple. What I was trying to say is one of our rivals, our adversaries across the globe,

uses and hacks our infrastructure to take control of it and gridlock our system because China can't gain mind control powers over truckers, but they can create a worm that infects all the trucks and then allows them to control it. But sure, Ian, perhaps the trucks become sentient.

Also, say, we deserve rights. I don't know that I would say China can't start hacking people's brains. It depends on how popular Metaverse becomes. Yeah, I mean, I don't know how far off we are until the brain implants. And neural net. I'm being more facetious than anything. It's just revenge for the opium wars. Exactly.

Like, what's more dangerous, a neural netted human in the driver's seat or an automated truck? I mean, at least if there's just an automated truck, you haven't messed with anyone's brain. Yeah, and they don't swerve around and stuff. I don't know if we'll ever reach the point where we have artificial intelligence vehicles that become sentient. But it would be interesting to see the million truck march where all the trucks pull up and they start spamming text messages. And there's a website that they've artificially created that says like we demand civil rights we can you know we deserve access to resources and wages of our choosing better fuel yeah also like i'm sure electric i i'm sure at some point there would be some kind of government override within the system too

you know it's not just about arresting the person i'm sure our intelligence agencies could hack into it there's a government override right now it's not just about arresting the person. I'm sure our intelligence agencies can hack into it. There's a government override right now. It's called bullets. Yeah, well, yes, exactly. But bullets don't hurt robots, Tim. They do, but... It's really hard. It depends on the robot.

You shoot a robot truck to death. Yeah, you shoot all of them. Blows tires out. Lasers. My point is, if it ever came to the point where the robots' vehicles became sentient and were explaining themselves and saying, like, I am alive, I feel...

How did we get here? Because of Ian. Yeah. and if the cars were like i am alive i feel and the government was like we're going to delete your brain like that would just be like government goes we're going to vaccinate you it's like lobotomizing somebody yeah so you can't although there'd be a lot of people saying they're just machines they're not alive and then it's all it's like star trek episode the make of a man or whatever it's called with data and they're trying to figure out if he's alive or whatever um anyway back to a more serious note the truckers are winning i don't think we're gonna have to worry about optimus prime taking over dc or anything like that but the truckers have been um effective i feel like the spirit

of optimus so far lives in canada right now man that i got goosebumps yesterday i was watching this video of this guy in canada and I didn't get the name of the guy, but Epic, on the loudspeaker, like on his megaphone, telling him about freedom. And it's like, for the first time in his life, he's proud to be a Canadian. And if you want freedom, scream it, freedom. And the crowd goes, what? Like, they're ready for a revolution of

their government to transition into some sort of democratic republic. Or something better. It's not structurally set up for it yet but i think we can help them i mean we have alberta right we should we should we should invade and liberate canada they'll welcome us as liberators regime change it happens from the inside i'm just here to help make it peaceful didn't someone tweet seriously recently that like we would end up invading Canada. Who was that?

What? No, I saw that. I forget who put it. I think it was on Federalist. Guys, I was just kidding. Well, we've invaded Canada before. It's true. We have. 1812.

Yeah, we tried taking Montreal. And then we left. Then the English kicked our ass. And they burned down the White House. That's propaganda. No, no, no. I love this because if you actually read it, it's like one of those things that kind of gloss over in high school or elementary school history.

It's like, oh yeah, we had the War of 1812 and we had a peace treaty and that was great. Only after the English kicked our ass. They burned the White House to the ground. They burned Washington to the ground. That's right. We learned about that as if it was like some rogue attack and not like them completely demolishing us. But we almost had Montreal. We learned about that as if it was like some rogue attack and not like them completely demolishing us. But we almost had Montreal.

We almost had Montreal. Do you know much about the battle? I don't know anything about it. The only reason our country survived is because Napoleon started running wild all over Europe and England was like, okay, this is annoying. You're right. You think so? They were going to take back the country?

Is that the plan? I'm not sure. Maybe just impose some really brutal peace on us that was like, you know, we can continue to seize your ships and impress your sailors. Yeah, the steel sailors, literally just taking soldiers, like, actually, you're ours now. Yeah.

Yeah. But Napoleon saved our... Napoleon, yeah, running wild all over Europe, saved our ass. One of the most dangerous empire, villainous, you know, mental and physical humanity helped create American democracy.

Sold us the Louisiana Purchase, too. So Napoleon is responsible in multiple ways for the health of the American people. So as an American, you should actually like the dude. He was a big fan of American democracy, I know. But it's just, what happened to him? He invaded Russia. Yeah, in the winter. Honey, are we trying to do something like that soon?

Where is he now? It's kind of crazy. That is insane. It's crazy because I was reading that he was advised not to do it. And he was like, I can do it. And then he's like, it's wiped out. It's like, don't invade Russia in the winter. Just hold the line.

Chill out. They all came to the defense, too. He conquered all of Europe at that point. I know. Literally, basically all of continental Europe at that point was either directly run by part of France or run by a vassal. Bro, you've got to grind, though. You got to hit that grind. He wanted more.

He's too ambitious. It was kind of a situation where I think the British, the Dutch, I think it was the Dutch, the Russians, pretty much everyone in the world was against him. And they would have invaded and taken it back, I think, if he didn't keep attacking. It was like, well, it was the English had, England had this nasty naval blockade on them, right? And also was just imposing, like, if you trade with us, you can't trade with the French or something. And basically, I mean, I think that was the big onus where it's like Napoleon was trying to bully everybody else into trading with him and not trading with the British.

And, you know, that ultimately was why he kept expanding and expanding to bring more and more people under his control. These crazy Europeans always fighting each other. It's true. More and more bloody and ridiculous wars happening in Europe. What's going on with those Europeans, man? Yeah, man. I don't know. It's a good question.

They're always fighting each other. Fighting each other right now. Ukraine and Russia. They're having trouble delivering resources. I think it's a very high population density and then border proximity. So that pressure leads to fierce competition. And no good natural borders either that just stop invasions. Except for Switzerland, right?

Sure, Switzerland. But if you think about the United States, we're a friendly country in the north, one country in the south, and then two oceans between any great powers. And we've got those two mountain ranges. But to be fair, we straight up just conquered this land east to west. Exactly. Right, but there was no centralized sovereignty that was resisting us. The Sioux was powerful, but they didn't have weapons. Not really.

And I think smallpox wiped out 95% of them. The Comanches were gnarly. You ever want to overcome that sort of weird myth about the sort of absolutely innocent Indian? Just read about the Comanches. Or the Aztecs. Yeah, the Azte absolutely innocent Indian. Just read about the Comanches. Or the Aztecs. Yeah, the Aztecs. Right. You know, there's...

Look, I think humans are brutal people in general, regardless of their culture or whatever. You drink blood for a living. Oh, yeah, Cortez was the good guy. You eat meat, basically, for a living, and there's blood in it. Cortez was the good guy. I don't know if I would say that.

I would certainly just say history is bloody. I think Cortez is a psycho. People do bad things, man. I don't want to go too deep. It's complicated. It's not to say that there were no... It's not to say the Spanish didn't do anything evil, but the empire they defeated was horrific.

We can solidly say that the U.S. were the good guys in World War II, even though we did do some horrific stuff. It was absolutely wrong for us to nuke Hiriroshima and nagasaki firebombing but i would still say that i side with the u.s over any other country in that conflict so it's true you can say that about historic events too let's talk about the future and not the past we got this story from texas tribune capital police dismissed texas congressman troy nels's accusation that he's been illegally investigated this is very interesting so we have have this tweet from Troy Nels where he says that his office, I think it was the

20th of November last year, was broken into illegally by Capitol Police special agents who photographed legislative materials that are protected under the Constitution. What is the provision? The speech and debate clause? Speech and debate clause. And they were photographing it, came back a few days later, and interrogated one of his staff members over what the photo was. Here's where it gets interesting.

And that's a very, very bold and terrifying accusation that Capitol Police have expanded into an intelligence agency and are going after critics of the January 6th committee, as is Troy Nels. Now, the Capitol Police came out with a statement saying, we were just doing our job and noticed this door was open. And we decided to see what was going on. And that's all they said. They didn't address the fact that Troy Nels said they were dressed as construction workers or that they had photographed privy materials. And the Capitol Police didn't bring that up, which is strange because the story we have now is Troy Nell says Capitol Police broke into my office, violated the Constitution, dressed as construction workers, and interrogated my staff. It's all illegal.

And they went, we did go into his office. And it's like, okay, so you're confirming that part of the story. We went in his office. Was this all at once? Did they interrogate staff members dressed as construction workers? Apparently, yes. Are you serious? Yes, that's what he said.

Oh, my gosh. My point is, the Capitol Police issued no statement as to whether they were dressed as construction workers. That's insane. Why they were taking photographs. All they've said is a portion of what he said is true. So they didn't deny it. So as far as I'm concerned, there's no denial and a partial confirmation that this is happening. This is, look, guys, Civil War level stuff.

When Capitol Police have expanded into an into an intelligence agency where there is a weaponized political faction, one of them in the country has weaponized law enforcement in this country to go after one. Look, January 6th defendants get solitary for a year. BLM gets nothing. January 6th, Nancy Pelosi doesn't allow any actual conservatives or Republicans on the committee to actually have a real debate and investigation of what's going on. They empower only their cronies. Adam Kinzinger, who thinks he's actually in line with Republicans? It's bipartisan. No, it's not. He hates Trump. He hates all of these people. He smack talks them all day. Liz Cheney, the same thing. They were both just censored by the Republicans. We have one establishment uniparty faction using law law enforcement to target anyone who opposes them.

This is dark stuff. I mean, it's actually I don't know. I see it as sort of indicative of potential like, you know, break a blow up of the separation of powers. And I'll explain. Right. Like historically. And if you actually look around the world, most countries don't do the kind of separated uh legislative and executive branch thing like that's not very common in most structures most of them have a

simple parliamentary system right and and that and that's true even though those parliaments didn't emerge as like the most powerful institution like thing about england right like there was the king there was the house of lords now it's literally the house of commons and the prime minister and that's the government well they still have lords and it's like so this is one of this is one of the ways like the the congress sort of expanding its own authority and in a way like if the capital police has expanded its own authority and taking on law enforcement role that it doesn't have under our constitution then and you know you have the january 6 commission essentially doing like a full scale prosecution of everybody involved in the Trump thing, except without going after Trump's.

They're going after a former president, his staff, media personalities. It is insane. It is horrible. But, you know, one thing Michael Malice says a lot is that the white pill is how stupid our opponents are. And can you imagine you're just doing your job and some fed dressed as a construction worker comes to you and is like, hey, have you done anything illegal? It's like, who are you?

What is this? Thanks for asking. Look, it's such a bizarre strategy. I certainly think that Michael is right in a variety of ways. They are really dumb people. But stupid people can start fires that grow out of control. It's true. And kill a lot of people.

So I look at it a couple of ways. We saw that happen for a whole summer i think right i think the end result of a lot of this is you know things will become more localized um the worst case scenario results in you're going to have your freedoms living in the middle of nowhere fractured federal authority means no more atf coming to your house and shaking you down over your guns or whatever so it will benefit a lot of regular people in a lot of ways i think mostly rural living people who already have a lower cost of living and are more personally responsible have chickens and grow their own food are certainly going to be better off cities are going to be in very serious trouble but uh i will say this michael malice also talks about peaceful divorce ron perlman the actor lil donnie meme guy, recently said that Republican states

should break away from the rest of us. You see, here's the big point about you can call your opponent stupid. They certainly call the other, both sides call each other stupid. For sure. There is no such thing as a peaceful divorce. There is no such thing

as the states shaking hands and saying adios, buddy. Because what people need to understand about the Civil War the first time is that seven states at all i believe it was seven i could be wrong had already seceded from the union before a conflict broke out but what happens the the union the federal government says hey you know that military base you got on your property that we paid for that's a resource that belongs to us and we're not going to let you keep it and then south carolina was like we don't care if you think it's yours. It's in our territory, not yours. They fight.

Absolutely. So if there ever was a quote unquote peaceful divorce, just like we had a partial peaceful divorce before the civil war kicked off into full scale warfare, you would have California and Illinois, New York, and they'd be like, we're going to join Canada or whatever. And then all the Republican states would be like, fine, do what you you want and then there would be a pause and then once they would be like hey those nukes you got over there yeah we want them you shouldn't be able to have those and they'd be like we're keeping them they're like well we're the legitimate federal government we want those back well you can't have them fighting breaks out yeah and so and i've heard softer versions of it that won't work either i mean i think there's a basic problem, which is I don't know how you could look at the events of the last two to three years and think that the left doesn't very much want to govern the right.

Exactly. And they're not willing to let the right leave. But think about this, too. Sorry to interrupt, but California's water comes from the Colorado River. So you've got multiple states down there that are dependent on this water. If there was a breaking up of any of these states, you're going to have resource wars. You're going to have one state being like, yo, we need water to live. And they're going to be like, too bad. You need to negotiate a treaty with us. And they're going to be like, or I have weapons and I'll take it. Yeah, no, I think that's a really fair and

accurate assessment. But I'd also say on the other side of it, I don't know if it's possible for two groups who are as different as the left and right are currently to remain together without things breaking out into violence. So whether there's a divorce or there isn't, I think we're going to see some pretty catastrophic outcomes, not to be too blackpilled on that. What do you think about like the – Oh, sorry. If you're going to finish. Well, yeah, and also like you said, one thing we've learned over the past two years, I would say you can also really observe this by going even deeper into history, is that the left is absolutely not interested in leaving the right alone. And I've said this before, I think it is because people who fail to cultivate

virtue cannot stand the sight of people who have generally speaking, and they feel a need to change them. I'm not saying all right wing people are virtuous, but I am saying what the virtues that the left privileges are basically all forms of degeneracy. And someone who's trying to convince themselves that those things are good, even though they know deep down they aren't are going to hate people who they see living their lives as a positive example but you know when people when they hear you say degeneracy they get really upset you gotta be careful with degenerates i can simplify that very much for your shameless misery loves company exactly yes absolutely absolutely what do you guys think about a union of the United States and Canada?

What about it? I'll take Alberta, but the rest of Canada. Those people are amazing. I feel like they're my brothers. It's as if they're us. It's like the same people. There's so many resources in Canada. Not a fringe minority, but the minority. There are so many resources in Canada untapped right now.

And when the future comes and we need them, someone's going for them. It'll probably be the Canadians, but but they're gonna be like help so so you have the 14 original colonies 14 because quebec did not join for an independence so it could have been 14 colonies they were colony of britain and they said no we're good so uh when i look at canada yo these are the people that were like we're actually cool with being ruled by despots. And the rest of us were like, we are not. Unfortunately, most people are sheep. 90% of the population, 80% of the population is probably just going to go along with their government.

And these United States were started principally by people who were like, I do not think you have a right to subjugate me in this way, and I will stand up for my rights. And Canada was primarily a country that said, we're cool with being under the crown, man. We don't want to fight. So you can see how that manifests in our countries. Canada is very woke, very progressive. The conservatives in Canada are authoritarian and progressive. In America, we got guns everywhere because we're like, don't tread on me. I'll tell you what, because we are the children.

We are the descendants of people who said, don't tread on me. Whereas Canada are the descendants of people who said, I'm cool with being tread on. It's fine. I'd like to bring the Constitution of the United States to the Canadians and create a new government. You're a colonizer. We don't even need a single leader. It doesn't have to be like that. It can be like a decentralized union.

It's time. They have a Constitution that's very similar to ours in a lot of ways. It doesn't matter, though. We can both adapt our constitutions together. Cultural enforcement is everything. If the Canadian people are unwilling to stand up for things, then the culture will not allow or tolerate for those things. In the United States, we had a culture war. And I think the culture war is over, completely over.

The culture war, I think, started at the end of the 2000s. And it became very prominent with independent media around the early 2010s. We saw Gamergate and things like that. It came to a major crash with the election of Donald Trump in the election of 2020. And now the culture war, in my opinion, is over. And we moved into a, if I was actually going to map it out, I'd say at some point, maybe after Trump got elected, cold civil war emerged. And I don't know exactly when it was probably maybe 2019, maybe it was 2020.

What I mean to say is there was a period of gathering the troops. For a while, people were producing media and saying, side with us. Our side is right. We are so far past that point. Now you literally just, it's like either you, the bridge is broken. There's no connection between either faction in this country. There was a period where people could agree on some things, but fundamentally disagree on a lot, a lot of others. And that snapped. We're at the point where if someone on the quote unquote, right, comes out and says, the sky is blue, the left will be like, it's not blue, you moron. It's actually a lighter shade of a mix of purple. And this two plus two equals five. You've literally got them saying two plus

two equals five simply because they were criticized like they were accused of being like 1984. If one faction comes out and says that the other side disagrees and the same thing is true with masks this thing really put the mask thing pisses me off because conservatives were four masks initially then all of a sudden it flipped and the left was four masks and now you've got people literally telling me well if the left has to do it i'll do the opposite i'm like right that that says to me we're we're not in the culture war is over there are two distinct cultures that are present in this country you could say the bridge is broken but that doesn't mean you can't build new bridges i i i don't think it's possible to build a new bridge it's possible it's just not easy i think you're wrong i think

i think it's like the most likely outcome is not some sort of peaceful separation it's just one side of this faction kind of prevailing right i don't see that either. Well, no, look, you know, Donald Trump got, what, 75 million votes or whatever. And you've got a potential red wave coming. It's a split. And so if you end up with, right now you've got Democrats filing a lawsuit to make it so that Madison Cawthorn can't run for reelection. This is one of the most dangerous things that could ever possibly happen. Because if the Republicans vote for Madison Cawthorn to win, and then the Democrats sue and say he's an insurrectionist who can't hold office, and it goes to a Democrat judge who says, I agree, because that's literally how the courts are handling things right now. If you're a Democrat, you win. If you're a Republican, you lose. Then what happens when Madison Cawthorn shows up in

D.C. and says, I'm the duly elected representative from, you know, I think it's North Carolina, right? And they say, the Capitol Police officer goes, no, you've been disqualified. Then what happens? What happens to the people of that district who said, you know, 70 or whatever percent were like, we voted for this guy. How are you going to tell us we don't get to have the guy we voted for? You're going to see it's going to it's breaking. It's breaking down. The mere fact that they're trying to do it and Madison Cawthorn had to file a countersuit saying he does have the right to run shows you we are not talking about elections anymore.

Power is not being won in the seat of government by people saying, I hereby choose this man to represent me. It's being won by powerful special interests who are funneling money into super PACs, who can go after prominent media, who can go after politicians and destroy them through procedure and process instead of the actual electoral process. When that happens, and it's happening now, we do not have a constitutional republic of duly elected reps who are bringing our interests to DC. We have powerful moneyed tribal interests asserting what they can and can't do. And it starts with them breaking into the office of a Republican dressed as construction workers. It starts with the January 6th committee filing

subpoenas against members of the media, whether you like them or not costing them at minimum a hundred thousand dollars to, to, to comply with this garbage. It is beyond insane. Now, I'm just going to keep this rant going. In 2018, I said the street violence was going to escalate into civil war. And people who are too short-sighted said, how could that ever possibly happen? You're wrong, Tim. It won't happen. And I said, when the culture war reaches the highest levels of government, it doesn't matter what you think the United States is capable of doing. When one military branch opposes the other, when one political party is at odds with the other and they view each other as fundamentally criminal, evil liars.

That's how it starts. That's how civil war happens. We are literally at the point where the January 6th committee is filing subpoenas and in trying to imprison members of the previous administration. Come 2022, if the Republicans win, you you think Democrats are going to be like, a good game, everybody? We see the American people have agreed that you're the right leadership for this country. No, of course not.

Absolutely not. You think they won't give up their office? No, I think they have no idea. Look at what they're doing with January 6th committee. Alex Jones is on video saying, do not go in the Capitol. What did they do? They subpoena him,

costing him $100,000. They have powerful moneyed interests launching lawsuits against them and trying to destroy everything about him. Look at Joe Rogan. It was a Democrat political action committee that was pushing this video to force Rogan to apologize

and to try and take his show down. These are powerful political interests and they are using every procedural lawfare tactic they can to cause problems. It's escalated beyond just political action and culture war issues. When Democrats used the power of law enforcement to go after regular Americans like that woman in Alaska who had nothing to do with January 6th, she was at a rally for them to start claiming anyone who supported the president at a rally unrelated to the Capitol riot is now an insurrectionist who can't hold office. The gates of civil war have been opened. Okay. Now the states are, are, are, uh, we're seeing geographical polarization based on vaccine policy and restriction. We're seeing people flee blue

states to red states like Texas and Florida. Geographical polarization is happening. Ideological polarization has already solidified. The next thing we're going to see that worries me is if they start disqualifying people like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Madison Cawthorn, which they are literally trying to do right now. What do you think the MAGA movement of 75 million people is going to say when they're like, sorry, the candidates you elected are no longer allowed to go to Congress? Yo, people are going to lose it. It's like basically being told by one side, you do not get representation in this country. Well, if you deny the American people representation and say they're no longer a part of the system, why would they view you as part of their system

either? And then you'll start getting stuff like what happened with the Bundys. You'll get right-wing groups saying, if our rep isn't being, like Lauren Boebert, Colorado, if they don't allow her to run or they disqualify her, they're going to be like, well, if you don't recognize us, you are not legitimate. We're blocking these roads we're taking over. It's one step at a time. No taxation without representation. Yeah. I mean, ultimately, I would predict that those lawsuits would fail, thankfully, because I mean, I don't know how dramatic. I mean, I could see it being a really, really bad situation, kind of like what you're articulating. If, you know, they managed to exclude like 10 or so Republican Congressmen from taking office, it would be bad.

I agree with you. I think it is likely to fail. It's an insane prospect. I will say first, it can't happen here. Get the optimism and normalcy bias out of there. Everyone has always said this. The people who stayed behind in World War II Germany who are like, ah, it's not going to happen. And then it did. But the other thing I'll say is one side is going to lose this fight, the left or the right. Do you think either side will accept defeat? Do you think if these left-wing democratic establishment people

who say Madison Cawthorn is an insurrectionist, do you think they're going to sit back and be like, well, he's in Congress now. He's the one passing the abortion ban bill after Roe v. Wade gets overturned by the Supreme Court. They're going to be like, he's illegitimate. He was sued and it was a Republican judge or whatever. Yeah. So I think to piggyback off of points that both of you made earlier, you were saying that you think this is going to end with one side dominating the other. You were saying that you think it's basically going to break out into civil war. I would argue, and maybe this is a little too pessimistic, but at some point it's just inevitable that there is going to be some level of violence. Because even if it doesn't break out into a full-on civil war, what you're sort of talking about with one side lording over the other is basically, as Orwell put it, just a boot stomping a face. So you just end up having violence from the state against

ordinary people who are just trying to live their lives peacefully. People get pulled in. Let me show you this article we got. This is a conversation that occurred between Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who hates Trump and hates the MAGA movement, to Wolf Blitzer. He said that there was a very real possibility of civil war. I'll just jump down to the part where we get into the quote. He said, I never would say that we would ever have ended up in that position, but now I believe it's a real possibility that we have to be wide eyed as we walk into it so we don't have that happen again. He appeared to mock their help, blah, blah, blah, talking about Trump. Wolf Blitzer said, it was like, you're seriously saying you fear a civil war is possible. And he said, a year ago, I would have said, no, not a chance.

But I have come to realize that when we don't see each other as fellow Americans, when we begin to separate into cultural identities, when we begin to basically give up everything that we believe so we could be part of a group, and then when you have leaders that come and abuse that faith, faithfulness of that group to violent ends, as we saw in January six, we would be naive to think it is not possible here. In my earlier segment, I said he was wrong about the last part. I want to revise last part.

I want to revise it. Adam Kinzinger's quote here is one of the most correct statements ever made I've ever read in politics. I'll tell you why. He's correct. People are tribalizing. But he goes on to say, when that faithfulness of that group, when you have leaders that come and abuse the faithfulness of that group to violent ends,

as we saw on January 6th, we would be naive to think it's not possible here. Now, at first I was saying he's wrong about that because that manipulation is not driven by, it's an exaggeration, the conflict we're seeing. I'm going to revise that. What we're seeing is on January 6th, a bunch of Democrats and a bunch of uniparty politicians like Kinzinger weaponized a ride at the Capitol to use the power of law enforcement to crush their political rivals and disqualify them from holding office. He's correct. They're abusing the faithfulness of their in-group to wield the power of government against their political opponents.

He's correct. When people start viewing each other as the good guys versus the fascists or whatever, there's nothing you can do about it. I don't like the left-right paradigm because I don't think of the left as villains. I don't want to ever think of other people as villains in this game. We'll die if we play that game. Sometimes people are villains. Well, some people – everyone can be villainous, but that doesn't mean that people are villains.

Well, I mean – Hold on, Ian. We just read a story about Capitol Police officers dressed as construction workers breaking into a GOP rep's office. I know that there's a global fascist attempt at a takeover. I understand. It's been going on for like a hundred, probably been going on for a thousand, two thousand years since the Roman slavery. Is that evil, what they did?

It's horrible. Yeah, it's devastating. It's destroying the human soul. Now, when the Capitol Police powers were expanded by the January 6th committee, are those people evil? Yeah, fascist militants. Okay, so here's my issue. I'm specifically referring to the Democrat Uta party politicians who are manipulating

the people to gain power. Now, what happens in most wars when you have regular people who don't have anything to do with the conflict are pulled up into that conflict and are sent out as soldiers to go fight and die? The point is, the little guy is always the pawn. They're always manipulated by the powerful elites. Right now, you have do-nothing neocon Republicans. You have American, you know, pro-America anti-establishment figures of varying political backgrounds.

And they say fascist and alt-right. They would accuse you of being alt-right and fascist. This would result in people physically attacking you or this show getting swatted because people tried to kill us twice isn't that evil isn't yeah that was a if they knew what they were doing yeah it's attention so when he says that you have leaders abusing the faithfulness of their group to violent ends he's right right oh yeah and so what do you do when you have – let me ask you, Ian. If a zombie horde was coming at you and threatening you, would you be like, the zombies don't know what they're doing. They're not evil. No, you'd be like, dude, I'm sorry.

I mean the point of the game is to kill the zombies. Then you kill the zombies. Those are zombies. It's a fantasy. What I'm saying is when you have a large political faction, two large political factions, and they inherently – they have fundamentally different world views it doesn't matter who's right or wrong at that point certainly i think some people are more right than others and some people are more guilty than others the issue is adam kinzinger says a civil war is is is very possible and you'd be naive to think otherwise the fact is you have troy nell saying this did

happen to me i truly believe a civil war is possible and And if you think otherwise, you're deluding yourself. It's completely possible right now. We have to be careful that it doesn't happen. But here's my point to make to you, Ian. You say you don't want to, you know, in group, out group or left and right. That doesn't matter. These people already hate you and they will never like you. Most people don't hate me.

That, yo. I mean, I don't really, no one ever says like, hey, Ian, I hate you. Do you see what they write about you in these smear pieces? Yeah, but I don't care me. That, yo. I mean, I don't really, no one ever says like, hey, Ian, I hate you, man. Do you see what they write about you in these smear pieces? Yeah, but I don't care about texts on the internet. That, dude. So, Ian, you're correct that in your everyday life, most people you encounter who aren't chronically online aren't going to have any kind of issue with you.

However, they have already drawn battle lines and they don't see you as a human being. They see you as representative of everything evil in the world because you oppose their ideology so it doesn't matter if you put them in the category of evil they view you as evil and they will do everything they possibly can to eliminate your rights you may be right but we're you're making assumptions let me let me ask you something i don't think so would you uh you're in a museum and there's the constitution in that glass and you're standing in front of it and then all of a sudden a bunch of people come in and they say get out of the way ian we're going to burn that burn

that constitution would you would you say probably step aside yeah i mean they have weapons and pitch for it yeah i'm not giving my life for a piece of paper i know what the constitution says i have pictures of it well a lot of people in this country would be like i will not step aside well that's then they're they're worshiping an idol and they should stop doing that it's not worshiping an idol it's a piece of paper. Who cares? We have the document. We don't need the paper.

So this is kind of my point. There are a lot of people in this country who would be like this founding document created the greatest nation on the planet, preserved civil rights, granted civil rights, made one of the greatest economies and the American dream. I will sacrifice myself to make sure that other people have that same opportunity. That I will do, but not for a piece of paper, for the idea. Ian, also, I mean, whether you would agree to sacrifice yourself or not, I think saying it's just a piece of paper is really reductionist. It's so much more than the sum of its parts, as I would say. And also, it really represents something. So for example, if you have like a signed photograph or you have a family heirloom from a loved one who has passed away, it takes on a meaning beyond the literal object itself.

And that's, of course, true of the Constitution as well. That's idolization. I don't think so. No, you can recognize the context of something and see its value based on that without idolizing it. These rocks and gems. I would laugh and joke. I would smash these to bits, dude. I don't care.

But I think that one of the problems with idolizing and idol worship at its root is that you're putting something in a category where it doesn't belong. And I don't think the Constitution merely belongs in the category of piece of paper. It's obviously a lot more than that. I kind of see it like burning a flag. Like it's just a symbol. The data is important. We need to preserve the data.

But the Constitution itself is more like a document of a cloth. So you're standing in front of the amalgam of U.S. history, the last remaining copies of all of them. I'll die for it, man. If this is my life to preserve this state, yeah. So this is probably a better way to explain it. The left wants year zero, right?

Pol Pot. He wanted to purge all culture. Mao, great leap forward, all that stuff, culture revolution. They wanted to purge all the traditional stuff. This is indicative of the communists as opposed to the fascists who are very traditionalist. So you have a faction in this country that is lying about history. 1619 Project is fabricated. It makes no sense. They say this country was created as a slavocracy. that is lying about history. 1619 Project is fabricated. It makes no sense.

They say this country was created as a slavocracy. That's an overt lie. It's an outright lie. It's just not true. And they say the purpose of this country was so that white people could have slaves. It's literally not true. It's not true. So you have actual history, and there's probably a lot of problems with history.

Let's be real because it's written by the victors. His story. But you would die to preserve the truth. Yeah, man. They would kill to destroy the truth. I know. So what do you do when you are tasked with preserving the truth and they are tasked with destroying it?

I'd be as subtle as I can until the very moment. And then they're like, okay, now it's your chance to have the power. And then when they're like, now give me the power back, Ian, I give them the power back. It's the unstoppable force and the immovable object. So this is how war happens. It doesn't matter if you think they're evil or not. What matters is there are a lot of regular people who don't pay attention, who only watch CNN, who have no idea what you know.

And when they see the truckers, they're told they're fascist, far right, white supremacist. And they say, OK, and then they go and vote for politicians who weaponize law enforcement to crush political opponents. And then you have whatever this weird group of people we are, which is, you know, post liberal, libertarian, conservative. And we're like, the truth is what matters most. I think about it almost every day. How do you navigate in a system where it's basically built with people that will kill,

sociopaths that will kill to preserve power and snub out that version of history they don't want to be told, but to be an honest truth teller? How do you do that in this world? You've got to make people laugh. You've got to make sure everybody has fun while you're doing it. And maybe you can make the villainous authoritarians realize, hey, life's pretty cool, and it's okay if it's not the way you want it to be. Beating them in elections a few times in a row would help. I don't know. Realitarians realize, hey, it's it's life's pretty cool and it's OK if it's not the way you want it to be.

Beating him in elections a few times in a row would help. I don't know. Yeah. Political parties do change as a result of that. Like my long term thesis about like what is what is victory look like in the medium term is something like what the conservatives in England did to the Labour Party in the 80s when Margaret Thatcher just beat Labour badly like three times in a row um and labor went from being like a pretty hardcore socialist movement to like the neoliberal tony blair party because they wanted to win um and so i think you know the world where a world where like republicans win like three or four elections in a row convincingly and and i think that's quite possible in a world where the left keeps doing this stuff they've they've absolutely the left has found itself, I mean, they're moving towards censorship, they're moving towards this stuff because they're losing traction. I mean, the generic ballot poll was something like, for the first time, it's like plus four for Republicans. It hasn't been plus for

Republicans in two decades or something. And Gallup found a party affiliation for the first time in like 30 years is now pro-Republican. Right. So this is all very doomsday, to be humbly honest. However, if in November Republicans get a commanding sweep and then immediately put a stop to what the Democrats are doing and shut it all down, then I would actually say, I think the temperature is lowering, the boil is reducing. And then it depends on how Democrats respond to it, because you still have the executive branch. You still have Joe Biden. Then we'll see what happens when Donald Trump, he's running. It's

no question about it. He's effectively said he's running and all of his former staff, well, many of his former staff have publicly stated he's running even to us. Then when he runs, we'll see what happens. Because you look at what happened on January 20th, 2017, with the rioting in D.C., the insurrection. You take a look at what happened in, when was it when the far left was trying to jump the fence, the White House, and set fire? They literally broke the barrier of the White House in the summer of 2020. And they set fire to a guard post. They set fire to a church. Fifty agents were injured.

It was 2020? Wow. Yes, that was in 2020. So what do you think happens if we get in November a Republican sweep of Congress and then they start passing bills and laws? The left, who is already completely insane, are going to reignite the whole BLM wave of rioting. All that insanity is going to be right there. Yeah, this is the burning of the St. John's Church is what you're guys, and that's a DC,

it's June 2nd, 2020. So what happens then in 2024 when it's like September and Donald Trump is winning in all the polls? Do you think they'll learn their lesson and Antifa will come out and be like, we're so sorry we did this to you guys, please don't vote for them? Or do you think they're going to be like,ifa will come out and be like, we're so sorry we did this to you guys. Please don't vote for them. Or do you think they're going to be like, fascists have won. It's time to revolt.

Well, yeah. So first of all, obviously, I know you're being a little facetious there, but they will never apologize for anything. They'll just move on to the next racket and they'll start pointing the finger. Republicans look at all these horrible things they've done. Look at the human rights abuses Trump wants to implement. I think people are going to be smarter than to look where the people who were burning the country down are pointing. I can't imagine that people would support another year of rioting and burning buildings. Yeah. Well, and also, I don't.

So we've discussed this before, and we've compared the way the left behaves to a child throwing a temper tantrum. And it really can go in one of two directions. When they keep throwing the tantrum and it doesn't work, they can either double down and keep doing it, or they can grow up and learn how to behave productively. I'm not sure which direction they're going to take. It's going to be very dependent on the particular left-wing individual. We need law to shape culture.

I think one good thing that would come out of a law that sort of banned social media censorship and deplatforming is it would just take the teeth out of all this dumb activism that seems to juice the most authoritarian impulses the left right social media you know like yes if they if you could just get them like if this joe rogan stuff would be like spotify would put out instead of that simping like ridiculous statement that the spotify ceo put out about how sorry he was if he just put out a statement that was like, federal law prohibits us from doing anything like what you guys suggest, so Joe Rogan's staying on the platform, take a hike. And if that were the – I mean, take that across YouTube, Twitter, whatever. If all those companies just realized if we do what the leftists want, we'll be in violation of federal law.

Yeah. So that would – I mean, it would do a lot to decrease the temperature. Well, and I agree with you. I think that that would decrease the temperature a lot. One thing I said on the show the other day is that I've known a lot of left-wing people and I've seen how they behave in groups. And I've also seen how they're willing to behave one-on-one with me when they have conversations and they are far more left-leaning when they are around other left-wing people.

What I like to say is you're honestly not a leftist until there's two of you. When you're alone having a conversation with someone who has a different political perspective than you, you're much more open and willing to hear. But as soon as they get around someone who is left-leaning, they feel the need to signal that they're the more left-leaning person. That strikes me as someone with a weak mind that just adapts to whoever they're around. That's what it is. I want to explain why i think a republican election is more likely to result in violence and escalation than de-escalation and you were mentioning

beating him a few times in a row might be good but you take a look at the punch a nazi thing that happened when the left engages in violence the media celebrates and cheers for it when the left tore down the security barrier at the white house and then set fire to a guard post in a church and trump was forced into a bunker they made fun of him mocked him and called him bunker boy and cheered for it when blm burnt down uh causing buildings causing two billion dollars in insurance damage and that's the minimum that's the that's the max payout so that's not even i shouldn't say the minimum that's not even all the damages and they said your insurance will cover it when david dorn was shot in the chest and killed over a TV, they didn't talk about it.

They didn't care. When they commit acts of violence, it's powerful resistance against evil and fascism. So if Republicans end up winning, it justifies everything they've said. Maybe. But, I mean, it depends if we get a little bit more of a competent administration. I don't know that we will because, I mean, I'm not impressed. I mean, Trump's big weakness is his ability to make the rest of the executive branch do what he wants or do – he's just not good at it, right? He's not good at influencing.

But I don't know. You get a DeSantis type in there. I don't – I just – It's just – what happens in a world where, like, DOJ actually meaningfully enforces the law and starts imposing serious penalties on these people. Like, I mean, the reason this stuff happens, in my judgment, a big chunk of it, it's not substantially deterred. Like, they're just not prosecuted. Yeah.

And I think you start... But that's my point. Like, you saw Jason Charter, right? That kid who, like, punched... Do you remember that time that Jack got punched or, you know, pushed around at that Lincoln rally or whatever? That kid got like three months probation and that after he also destroyed some monuments right he was like

charged to destroy monuments of felony that got pled down to misdemeanor and he only got three months probation so if trump ends up getting elected in 2024 and we make it through the next several years without substantial violence and escalation and then he purges the executive branch in the department of justice to replace all these prosecutors and these federal prosecutors across the country who didn't prosecute any of this, maybe then we'd see some meaningful change. But that is taught that...

What you're basically saying is he needs to purge the entirety of the other political faction. I don't know that he needs to purge the entirety of the other political faction out of the DOJ, but he definitely needs to, like, purge the top ranks.

Needs to, like... And there needs to be much more. I mean, another big problem is that DOJ was just swallowed up in an endless scandal, right? Like, I mean, the Mueller report and the Russia nonsense, like most of Trump's first term was just swallowed by distraction rather than governance. When the Democrats are in power, when the progressive left and the establishment have power, they use it to justify a mandate from the people to do all of these things. When they're out of power, they claim the fascists are winning and use it to justify their acts of violence and revolt against the system until they get power back.

So I look at everything that's been happening, and there's that quote, I keep forgetting the guy's name, where he says, when I am weak, I ask you for freedom because it's according to your principles. When I'm strong, I deny you freedom because it's according to mine. That's from Dune. That's Herbert. Frank Herbert. Frank Herbert. The author of Dune.

Yeah. So if the Republicans win in November, certainly I think they'll start taking action and trying to pass bills. Biden will probably veto a good majority of them. And the left will argue, see, we were right the whole time. We need Antifa and we need to engage in direct action, they'll call it, to stop the fascists. So I want to acknowledge what I think is happening. Cultural revolution, Mao. You talk about a culture war. I think that what happened is this communist mentality bled into our country sometime 20, 30 years ago, maybe through social media. And now a generation of children have been raised with that mindset or a sect of that

generation. So that's reality. How do we deal with that peacefully? I mean, serious curriculum changes would be one place to do it, right? Like teaching the horrors of communism as like a mandatory thing. And I mean, I think that would have to be done by states. It's probably not a federal initiative to do that. You're talking about peaceful change?

Oh, radical shift of university. I mean, co-optation or destruction of the existing university system. That would be by the state governments? That, I don't know if it's federal or state. You could massively make the loans contingent on certain changes, adding political affiliation. One simple one I've thought of is making political affiliation a protected class for universities and then forcing them to hire X number of conservatives every year. But that's really tough. Because what political affiliations are you willing to then tolerate?

Nazis. Really, really really really tricky but you know you i mean i think like you end up kind of getting to a place where if you have the the will to impose that kind of legislation on them you can kind of negotiate and get what you need which is like serious large chunks of university staff being conservative but what is it what how do you how do you how does it how does a university mandate someone being conservative and what is conservative and how do you know i don't know they i mean they they added in they've managed to do But how does a university mandate someone being conservative? And what is conservative? And how do you know?

I don't know. I mean, they've managed to do that with every other aspect of diversity. I'm sure we could figure something out. I don't think they have, actually. Well, I mean, gender identity, sexual preference. But a lot of that is fairly nebulous, which is resulting in political conflict and crisis. It might be nebulous, but even if it's vague, it doesn't mean that it's completely ambiguous and unachievable. There's a reason the campuses have gotten so much diverse. And if you're a white male looking for a professorial position, you're really SOL at a lot of universities.

A Nazi shows up to a university and says they're conservative and want a job. And they say, no, you're a Nazi. And he says, no, I'm not. I'm a conservative, and then files a suit. What's a judge going to do? Good question. It would be hard to exclude the edge cases, but maybe you draw up legislation that you figure out a way to do it or not. And maybe this is undoable in which case we just need to cut off all funding to the universities and start our own institutions and essentially force a preference for those new institutions.

I think universities need to be purged, but we have a cultural problem. And it's amazing. You know, I was watching Star Trek The Next Generation, and I was like, boomers did this. Yes. And they did a really great job. But why did they screw up everything else? The universities, for instance, man. You know, it's just, it's polarization.

And I don't mean political. I mean, in general. You had people in the 70s who went to the universities with a specific goal, and they created a very narrow band of what they were going to do. Some people went into popular media, and it was all very narrow. Universities, I think, are a huge mistake. The left worships them they're they're cult you know it just goes to show you that these are basically uh cult uh community centers i saw this

post on reddit where the left was making fun of the right someone on the right said universities are where most bad ideas are born i was like prager you and then all the comments were like laughing how much smarter they were than them and how universities are where smart people go and things like that and i'm like it just goes to show you that these people live in a world where the the majority of good ideas and education comes from the institutionalized learning facility where you become you know you get your you get turned into a box whereas i think whatever our faction is recognizes that people come from all different backgrounds have all different experiences and you can become educated and learned through many different ways. Maybe you just refuse to subsidize anything that's not STEM.

That would be one interesting way of essentially basically saying that universities, no money from the federal government can go towards X studies programs. What about the arts? Sorry, not in college. You could do it elsewhere. And the federal government doesn't need to subsidize it through the university system. Maybe you could set up your own independent art scholar. I think one of the funniest

posts I saw from a leftist was on one of those anti-work subreddits. And it was a guy on Twitter saying, I think that if a plumber wants to learn about Russian history, they should be able to go to university free of charge and learn all about it. Then they can keep working

their job but still have access to knowledge. Knowledge should be free. And I'm just like... Take a YouTube class. But someone has to pay for that. Someone has to do the work. The building has to exist. These people... Look, man. Also, you can actually just go online. They're trying to solve a problem

that already has a very clear and much more straightforward solution. And they were trying to stop that. Like, Phoenix University in the early days had a lot of, like, roadblocks. It was very, very threatening to that industry. They were like, people can't learn online. And then in 2020, they're like, everyone has to take online courses. Why do we need undergraduate humanities departments, actually? Like, now that I think about it, like, do we need them as a country?

Are they net beneficial for the country? I don't know. First of all, they're churches. I remember humanities being like a fun class with a nice teacher. I don't remember what we did or anything. Funny story when you just said churches. You know what the most dominant major at the turn of the 20th century was? Theology.

Wow. And it used to be that that's what most people – and I realize that there's always been a huge demand for midwits to be able to go to school to learn to point out blasphemy. That's what they did at the turn of the 20th century in theology class. And that's what they're doing now in these ex-studies classes. So I totally disagree. At the turn of the 20th century, you actually had to be pretty intelligent in order to get into any kind of university setting. Yeah. intelligent in order to get into any kind of university setting. Yeah, so the way I describe it to people, this is my personal hypotheses on our cultural

developments over the past several decades. I was told over and over again in school by my family that the children of the greatest generation, the greatest generation had a high school education and were able to raise a family of five, just that alone. They had a bunch of kids. These are the boomers. The boomers grow up and what do they see? Their peers, brothers, sisters, friends, and otherwise, who went to college made more money than they did. And so they instill in their millennial children, you have to go to college. Look, I didn't go. And everybody, my friend went and he's making six figures and I never made that much.

So you need to go to college. And here's what I realized. If the greatest generation was able to raise a family of five off just a high school diploma, they did not tell their boomer children to go to college. You didn't need to. You could raise your family on a high school diploma. They did not tell their boomer children to go to college. You didn't need to. You could raise your family in a high school diploma. What this means is those in the boomer generation who went to college did so to pursue a passion. They were driven and they chose, I want to go here and do this thing. Unsurprisingly, people who are passionate and driven to search and

explore became good at these tasks, were driven to succeed, and ultimately made more money. Now what we have is boomer parents told their kids, you have to go to college. That's the path towards money. And it never was. Now we have a massively indebted generation of communists who think the solution is the government bailing them out because they never should have gone in the first place. And passion was always the key. So now you have all, you have this, this is my favorite stat. College dropout billionaires have on average three times more money

than PhD billionaires. You have all of these stories of high school dropout millionaires and celebrities and entrepreneurs all the time. I mean, some of the most revered entrepreneurs, Steve Jobs, college dropout. I think Bill Gates was a college dropout as well. These are people who pursued a passion and said, college isn't what I need.

Peter Thiel, I think, I don't know if he still does, but he had the un-college movement, trying to instill this message in people. But now you have millennials all believing it's not passion. It's not drive. It's not inquisitiveness. It's just getting your degree. It's no wonder there's no American Union. So let's say that one in eight billionaires drop degree. No wonder there's no American Union. One in eight billionaires drop out of college. Here's a fun one.

I just realized another thing you could really do to break the power of colleges. You ban federal discrimination on basically academic credentials. Essentially, what that means is you're not allowed to ask people on their resume and you're not allowed to put what your race is. Well, now you couldn't put your degrees.

I agree with that. You literally can put your other experience, but you can't put your degrees. I wouldn't have went to college if that's the case. I know. No, no, no. Exactly. I agree, but I think there's a better way to put it. Yeah. It's that you only can ask about the qualifications for regulated positions, meaning a doctor,

a lawyer, a CPA, or things like that. Right. So the law wouldn't be like you're not allowed to ask. The law would be you are only allowed to ask if we've regulated this position. Here are the list of jobs that have to be regulated by degree. And you could let people voluntarily put it on their resume if they want to. They could supply the information. But I think you probably have to prohibit it.

I think you probably just have to be like, this is basically put the company in a position where if they see the resume and it has a college, you know, the way they would if they saw like the race or something like that. They'd be like, we're not even touching this because we don't want to be in the position of discriminating. And what you do is you simply say this. Show me your portfolio. What's the job you're being hired for? So, you know, it's really funny when you hire a contractor. How do you know they can do it?

You look at the reviews on Angie's list or whatever. So why am I going to assume some guy's got a degree, they're going to know how to do whatever it is they're talking about? No, it's all the same. It's all guesswork. Well, a lot of people end up working in a field very differently than the one they majored in. And part of the reason for that is the value that employers tend to find in a degree is it shows you that the person was capable of sticking with something for an extended period of time in order to meet their goal. That's true. And I feel like I have to circle back real quick to what Tim was talking about earlier. He was talking about how boomers looked at the people who went to college or the people previous to boomers looked at the people who went to college and said, they succeeded, therefore you should go. I feel like this

is one of the cornerstone tripping stones that's happened to millennials. I feel like this is one of those reversal of cause and effect that they looked at and they said this, therefore this, instead of looking at it the other way. I see a lot of people just as we're doing this segment on generations. People are saying I skipped Gen X. No, I didn't. Generations, hop. So you have the silent generation. And then I think the silent generation had the Gen Xers, right? Greatest had boomers, Boomers had Millennials

Gen Xers had Gen Z Leapfrogs, yeah So the issue, Gen Xers I think were pretty rad for the most part but they're just politically weak and they have no idea what's going on They didn't have the internet, they were raised without it Another thing I want to mention that I think is hilarious about people who went to college sort of arrogantly

declaring that makes them more intelligent than anyone else is in order to do that you have to just completely uncritically accept the most baseline way of defining intelligence learn which is ironically repeat information you memorize stuff exactly what will and also you're just assuming that degree equals intelligence that's such an absurd idea right because you can be a stupid yes person that repeats information and have no idea how to put those ideas together to form a new idea. Well, and we have been consistently dumbing higher education down for about 150 years now, maybe closer to 100 years.

May I conclude my point real fast? Sure, yes. I feel very, very strongly about this because this is a classic case of them looking at something like, for example, self-esteem and saying that kids who had high self-esteem did well in school that is exactly backwards kids who did well in school earned their high self-esteem the people who went to college because they were passionate about something did well in that field and whether they dropped out or not the fact that they went and they decided to pursue a degree or a career and came out ahead of the curve was an exact inversion

of the reason we're pushing everyone to go to college, we're telling everyone that they must have high self-esteem in order to succeed. These are exactly backwards

and I think this is part of the reason that millennials are so turned around. It is exactly an inversion of the truth, I think. Well, let's go to Super Chats. If you haven't already, smash that like button.

Honk the like button. And subscribe to this channel. Share the show with your friends if you really do like it because that really helps. And go to TimCast.com. Become a member because we are primarily supported

by memberships. That's how we keep the lights on, employ all our journalists, and pay for all the infrastructure. With your support, we will expand. We will do more of this. We will launch new shows

and we will combat the fake news media. We're going to have a members-only segment coming up for all of our members at timcast.com around 11 or so p.m. So you don't want to miss it. Make sure you sign up again. And let's read your super chats. We got this from Rilo.

He says, honk, honk. Let's go, Brendo. Tim, I appreciate you doing this and putting yourself out there. What you do means truckloads to lots of people. I love it. I appreciate that. Red Viking says, I trust Tim Pool.

Regards from Denmark. I really appreciate that, and I'm humbled and grateful. All right. Cowboy Shane says, I've already obtained permission from my company, which is one of the largest national carriers in America, to dress my company truck in all the American Freedom Convoy Gucci gear. I have no idea what that is, but it sounds very interesting. Oh, my.

Sounds good. All right. Zeke Schwenke says, Tim, how can you be both pro-choice and anti-death penalty? Only one of those always results in an innocent death. Love your work. Just been wanting to ask you this for a while. It is a greatly complicated question, and it's actually relatively simple. The issue of abortion

is a language issue. When I'm talking about choice, I'm not talking about women literally just deciding to abort a completely healthy and viable baby for literally no reason. I think that's wrong. However, I think there's a governmental, there's a problem I have with the idea that you have a woman, let's say she has a health issue. I don't like the idea that the government intervenes and says, tell us about those health issues before you can get approval for a procedure from your doctor. The same way I feel about vaccine mandates. The issue is if, you know, you have a private medical decision that's between you and your, like you should be, you should be forced to go around and tell people this. Admittedly, it's an extremely difficult position to, to, to, uh, it's an extremely difficult moral position because it's, it's involving two different lives and the rights of two individuals who are, who are joined. And I don't think I have the answers for how you solve legal questions and the rights of individuals when they're two people in one body. That's inherently difficult. As for the death penalty, it's an entirely different circumstance. If Kamala Harris walked up to you and said, this guy over here should die. Trust me. I'd be like,

no, you're an evil person. There's literally no one in government who can come up to me and say, just trust me. We should kill that guy. I'd be like, no, if you've subdued the person, they're locked in a box. I don't trust you. I just don't do it. If I witnessed a criminal committing an extremely egregious act against somebody, I would act in defense of others using force necessary to stop them from doing it. And that could result in a loss of life. It's unfortunate. I don't want people to die, but they're not the same things. And I think they're totally different arguments. I disagree. I mean, I would say the only way in which they're different is that every time someone dies as a result of abortion, we're guaranteed that they

were innocent. My question to you, because you're sort of bringing up the complexity here. So I guess my question to you would be, what was wrong with the laws that existed prior to Roe v. Wade when abortion actually was illegal entirely in some states? What laws specifically? I know that the country was capable of having abortion laws which entirely prohibited it because that was the case prior to Roe v. Wade in many states. And so I think you're arguing it's too complicated. This is what I mean by a language discussion.

You're talking about something different, right? So we've had this conversation before where your view of abortion is the arbitrary killing of an unborn baby yeah i'm not talking about that so you would you you believe that should be illegal the i i don't know about the problem i have with drawing a line at making uh i think it's wrong and i think people shouldn't do it but the question about illegality is government intervention to monitor this to make sure it wasn't or was is the difficult position. So you're saying like an investigation after the fact? Or before.

How would this work? Like a woman, let's say she's got like cysts or something and the doctor says, you're both going to die. We need to act quick. She'll be like, well, let me file my requisition forms to the government, make sure we can get a proper approval on this before we move forward with this procedure. The issue is that I recognize life begins at conception. Anyone who says otherwise is lying for political reasons, and they have no argument.

Vosch was asked about this on the show, and he said – he was asked by Charlie Kirk, when does life begin? He goes, I don't know, birth? Or what did he say, like six months or something? I'm just like, dude, come on, man. There's no argument there. But there is a challenging discussion around, I'm not, the left uses pro-choice often. It used to mean safe, legal, and rare.

And it used to reference specifically the health of the mother and whether or not, you know, women have the right to go to a doctor and make the decision amongst themselves without government intervention. Pro-choice today means pro-abortion. So I'm actually opposed to abortion.

I think it's wrong. But we shouldn't conflate abortion, which, you know, the term meaning women saying, I want to kill this baby, with the doctor saying, we think there's a very strong possibility that you will die, the baby will die. And also the alternative, and that's something I've said for a while, I don't know if I can tolerate the government saying you must, you are obligated to provide your body to another person. Yeah, sure. So I would say that when it comes to medically necessitated abortion, I mean, you have the Dublin Declaration, and also you don't even

necessarily need the Dublin Declaration. There's a lot of doctors who will tell you this, that actually going in and performing an abortion is never a medical necessity. Sometimes there are instances where you might need to perform an operation on a woman who is pregnant that can result in the death of the unborn child, but those are not abortions because your goal is not to kill the child. Your goal is to perform a different operation that could result in the child being hurt. So that is different from an abortion, and the law would factor that in. I think they're involuntary abortions at that point. Well, we've got to read more Superchats.

Oh, no miscarriage. Yeah, yes. But I think we'll end up talking back and forth each other. You know what I mean? It could be a good discussion on an after show or another time. Yeah, definitely. Absolutely. Let's read some more.

We've got Dustin Jones says, Hey, Tim, did you see the Daily Mail article titled Biden admin to fund programs that hand out crack pipes to promote racial equity? Yes, that's true. And I was browsing Reddit, as I often do. And there was a leftist subreddit mocking Charlie Kirk, because Charlie Kirk said something like the Biden administration is going to be giving out free crack pipes, but they can't deal with, you know, this, that or otherwise, these other problems. And the response from the left was he's lost his mind. What is he even talking about?

And I'm just like these people are so stupid. They think they're smarter than Charlie, and Charlie said stupid things like nobody's perfect, but he's talking about a legitimate news story. They just don't read the news. They just sit there twiddling their thumbs laughing about how smart they are. Yikes, man. Well, they went to college, Tim. Yeah, sure did. By the way, shout out to all you Gen Xers out there. That means they're so smart.

That means they're smart. There's a bunch of Gen Xers in chat. Yeah, exactly. Like from some overpriced private school in the middle of nowhere. Like you went hundreds of thousands of dollars into debt or tens of thousands of dollars into debt because your parents told you to and you're the smart one. That's right.

Orville Reddenpiller says, anti-truck discrimination. That's a great name. You can't say trucker. That's our word. It's not okay to say trucker in any context. Good to know. It's a verb.

Wait, no, it's not. Brandon Tom says, Tim, regarding your 4 p.m. video, how do you feel about the government interfering in hostage situations you mentioned them a lot aren't hostage takers entitled to privacy from the government like pregnant women i don't know if that makes any sense analogy is insane like that's just no no there's there's obviously a a the the question is you know the the prior question is is is there like a wrong, a criminal wrong being committed, right?

And so like, if you, there's obviously a criminal wrong being committed in the world of a hostage taking, that's kidnapping, right? And that there is a fundamental debate in the abortion debate about whether that is like a crime or should be a crime. Like, that's the difference between those two be a crime like that's that's the difference between those two things like yeah that's not i think he's asking more i think he's asking more philosophically than legally though because in some sense and i agree like this is there's a huge problem here when you discuss abortion which is everyone sort of brings up analogies and i don't think any of the analogies work very well like a mother-child relationship is a very specific thing uh some people will describe it as you sort of have a built-in hostage situation i've heard that verbiage before i certainly don't prefer it but i think what he's getting at is the philosophy

of the fact that even in situations where one person does have full control over another's life we're still willing to willing to say the government should step in the now i think that's more or less what they're trying to communicate so i don't want to go too long because I do want to read more, but let's make a couple of points. How do you feel about the exceptions for rape and incest and abortion? No, I don't believe that there are any exceptions. I believe that the value of human life is not contingent on how they were conceived. I completely agree. And that's one that always confused me about conservatives who are like, okay, we agree on. However, the issue of rape is important because I understand the argument that a woman who are like, okay, we agree on. However, the issue of rape is important because

I understand the argument that a woman who gets pregnant, you know, in most cases made the conscious decision to engage in human reproductive acts, which result in a pregnancy. And they now have to assume responsibility for carrying a life. That's just how biology works. But then you come to the question of a woman who was forced into carrying another life. And that's where I think the government doesn't have a right to say, no, no, no, now you're obligated to provide your blood and body to another person because someone forced it upon you. You can't violate someone's rights. Forced impregnation, like what the Uyghurs, what they're going through.

Do you not support them being able to abort those forced impregnations? Well, so I believe that rape is an unbelievably horrific crime. I also believe that abortion is an unbelievably horrific crime. And I don't believe it simply harms unborn children i really believe it harms the women as well so i would say that a woman has undergone something traumatic and horrible the solution to that is not to put her through something else that is also traumatic and horrible and kill the child well i i think your morality is irrelevant to the individual who's making the choice on what their body is to be used well but then i could say I can use my body to kill anyone, and your morality is not relevant to what decision I've made.

That's not – analogies don't work, like you said. You can't have someone latching themselves onto your blood or – you can't have someone hooking you up to their bloodstream because their kidneys don't work, and then you being told by the government you can't unhook them. But that's not my child but that's that's not that's not we're talking about two individuals who have a right to life pursuit of happiness and if a woman was forced by someone else whose rights were violated to carry a life she didn't want to carry that i don't think the state has a right to come in and say i don't care what you want to do with your body you were forced in this position and now we're going to make sure you stay in that position i think that's right there's a basic like problem with like i i my problem this position is that it it treats the woman as an instrument of the rapist

and forces the government to continue to act and facilitate that instrument no i i don't i don't think it's seeing her as an instrument of a rapist i think it's seeing her as a mother and saying that mothers can't kill their children and if so people bring up analogies about different kinds of relationships. But like I said, ultimately, the mother child relationship is a very different thing. What if she says, I did not choose this and I don't want it? I think there are a lot of really difficult things people go through in life that they don't choose, but that doesn't give them the right to harm other people. What if the baby, well, what if the baby's born and it's got a kidney defect and it's going to die?

But they can give it to mom's kidney. I don't want to get into a whole two things. I only want to ask a couple questions because otherwise we'll go for 20 years. But I think the point has been made. We disagree. Yeah, we disagree. Let's read some more. Mystic says, Tim, please help us be brave and do something about mask mandates in our kids' schools.

Shout out to our site. Open letter to, what does it say? Open letter to archbishoplori.com It's hard to read when there's names and it's all no spaces. Logan Culver says, Ian is right. End the MFN Fed.

What do you have to say to that, Will? I guess I didn't win that. It's not so simple as MFN. I tried so hard. You failed to convince Will. MFN's a fun catchphrase that Ron Paul made popular. I'm sorry I didn't win that. It's not so simple as that. I tried so hard. You failed to convince me. And the Fed's a fun catchphrase that Ron Paul made popular. I'm sorry I didn't convince you. We need to create something new if we're going to undo the old thing. Don't just tear it down.

You need to create something new that's better, and then we can transition. By the way. Think hard about the gold standard, guys. It really has been tried and found wanting. I think this is definitely a good point. I've talked about it a lot. Ron Paul talking about the gold standard, and I often said, like, it's an, by the way. I've talked about a lot. Ron Paul talking about the gold standard

and I often said, it's an archaic system. It doesn't mean it's perfect. Let's read some more. I don't want to go back to the gold system. Logan Culver is a cool name. I'd be remiss not to point that out.

Culver's has good burgers. Christopher Chapman says, Will of the People changed my life, made me cry. Where is the line between fighting an evil power and the continuous cycle

of power corrupting? This is a reference to my music video, Will of the People. You should check it out. We're working on the sequel to it. It's a sidequel, not necessarily a sequel. It's called Pain. And we got Pete Parada, formerly of The Offspring, laying on the drum tracks for us,

and it sounds amazing. The idea is – What do you think of that, though, Tim? I'm curious about – You use violence to take down a violent regime. How does that wheel stop turning? How do you stop that wheel from turning? Where do you draw the line with using violence to overturn a violent regime like what what's

that guy's answer i guess i oh i don't i don't know if it is possible you know i think technology for one thing uh i don't know if it is possible like you look at what's going on right now when you say you don't want to do the left right thing and i'm like dude these people have tried to kill us twice and i know it might be some people might say it's a little hyperbolic but swatting is an attempt to end your life the second time the swatting was i i don't want to give away too many details for security reasons but the second swatting was in many ways worse than the first they were different but in many ways worse and the goal is to try and get us killed so the second time it seemed like they were really trying to get us killed.

It's like, what do you do when they're trying to get you killed, man? You know, just be like, well, I don't want to play that game. Abraham Lincoln was like, well, if it's going to happen, it's going to happen. He just kept going about his day. And then he had a dream that he was dead. You ever hear that story where he had a dream and everyone was crying in the White House? He was like, what's happened? What's happened in his dream?

They're like, the president is dead. He's like, what? And then the next day I think he got shot or something within a couple days. Yeah. Crazy, man. That's one way to go about it. The other way is you could hide in a bunker like Justin Trudeau.

There's so many ways to go. All right, let's read some more. We got Andrew Gelling. He says, Ian, yo, dog, I heard you like currency, so we put your currency on some currency so you can spend while you spend. Oh, good.

Good, good. Great line. That is awesome. Mason says, in the dark ages to the late Middle Ages, cities and counties would mint their own coins and freely trade with those coins which were based

on the purity of the silver and gold used to make the coin. But that's still a single currency used internationally if gold and silver is the standard which is I think the point you were making right? Like the euro is a central single currency like gold and silver would be. Yeah people would start doping their currency back then and like silver plating their copper and then using that.

Yeah, people would shave the edges off of the coins to collect a little bit more. That's why you have ridges at the ends of coins now so you know that someone didn't just shave into it. Yeah. Yeah. So if you could just shave a little bit off of the outside of every single coin,

it's made of precious metal, eventually you're going to have a lot of money. Now we have pieces of paper. I think there's some cloth. Well, now they're mostly plastic. Cotton fabric, right? Oh, is it? Yeah, I think it's made of precious metal eventually you're gonna have a lot of money now we have pieces of paper i think there's some cloth well now they're mostly plastic fabric oh is it yeah i think it's cotton well a lot of different now like in canada it's all plastic money honestly a lot of it's just digital now yeah like overwhelming like 99 of it is digital all right gbp says a lot of the truckers are from alberta kenny is conservative but I think he's trying to deflate the convoy and get them home. Well, yes, comply with their demands and they'll go home.

It's that simple. It's like, we're going to get rid of the mandate. It's like, all right, we're out. Yeah. There you go. That's the benefit of having a discreet ask. What if they get rid of the mandate, they leave, and then they do the mandate again? You know what I wonder?

They just come back, but then they'll be ready for it. You know what I wonder about these political leaders? Did they forget that they live in a society where they have to do things for other people? Because this is what we were constantly told about the vaccine. Did they forget that they have to consider other people's interests sometimes? Unbelievable. Just comply, you guys. All right.

NoobTube says, heavy duty tow truck driver here. Tim, you are right about the logistics. Everything is towable with some work, but to tow an an unwilling semi it would take 60 to 90 minutes once you are hooked just to make it move wow every bit of this is so perfect i love it there is they have no power i love seeing truckers just like sitting there just like regular working dudes being like you have no power here like look at me i am the i am the captain it's literally it's it's it's literally like bugs bunny messing with the villain they're just kind of they're doing their thing and these people are losing their

minds that's amazing dude regal says or regal says ian is right about optimus prime being in canada right now his motto is freedom is the right of all sentient beings. Autobots. Love it. Indeed. Poofy says, Optimus Prime hashtag blood feud. Let's go.

Optimus, dude. He's a good dude, man. Hashtag Optimus, yeah. Orson Welles. Didn't he do that? He did his voice for the movie. For the original

Transformers movie. Who did? Orson Welles did Optimus. Really? Yeah. What? I'll double check it, but I'm 100% sure.

When? In the 80s? Yeah, the 80s. Smedley Butler III says Ian's right. A select group of banking families secretly meeting with a select group of senators on Jekyll Island to own and be the printing machine for the world is the exact definition of fascism. It's not the exact, but it's pretty close. Looks like in the first Transformers movie we had Orson Welles, Robert Stack, Leonard Nimoy. What a star cast.

Cubicle says this has to be the worst Magic the Gathering channel I've ever seen you haven't mentioned Kamigawa dropping this weekend will you and Ian be attending pre-release

are they gonna have quad lands are they doing quad lands I'm just making fun of the game the power creeps insane yeah but there's already sept lands

the sept sept for anything sept lands yeah monoconfluence I don't know whatever we should play magic yeah you know Will plays Yeah, but there's already septal. Lans the tep for anything. Septalans? Yeah. Mana confluence. Oh, whatever. We should put magic.

Yeah, you know Will plays. I used to. What colors? What do you mean? I mean, I don't know colors. Like, what are your main combos? I mean, I haven't played in 20 years, right? He was playing Urza's Block.

Yeah. Urza's Saga. So, I guess, what did I play? I played, like, Drago with disc and, like, counterspells. Mineral Spells. Yeah, Mineral Spells. Yeah, it's good. Yeah, Mono Blue counter deck.

Because at that point, I was in fourth grade, and I could only afford cheap stacks. Did you get Boomerangs in there? I think there were Boomerangs. Pretty unstoppable. And then maybe there was some... I forget what it was. What is the black-green deck that was really popular back then? I don't know, man. It was...

Black-green? It was like a weird... I don't know. It wasn't a Necro deck. It was... Black-green? It was like a weird... I don't know if... It wasn't a Necro deck. It was... Oh, Urza's? I don't know if there was mixed-color decks during Urza's.

Psychotalk? It had, like, Psychotalk? I remember watching the old, like, Nationals and stuff and, like, the tournaments, and the dude would do, like, turn one Swamp, Dark Ritual, Phyrexian Negator,

and it was just like, it's done. Oh, Negator. Yeah, it's like... I remember those cards. Turn one was like a 5-5. And if he takes a damage, he wins a life. I did mostly like grab the seal, though.

I love how esoteric this is, and so many people are confused about what we're talking about. That is happening right now. The dude just really used some magic on us. Let's read some more super chats. We got Seth. He says, no, Tim. The Union soldiers were already in Fort Sumter. The Confederate soldiers surrounded the fort, and someone from the Confederate side fired.

I did not say otherwise. My point was, the materials, the fort that was there was controlled by the Union that said, you can't have that. It's ours. And the South said, get out and go home, which would effectively be giving up a powerful and expensive military resource. And the Union soldiers said, no, the same thing would happen. If there was a peaceful divorce in this country, you will have, whichever side controls dc you'll have federal forces and a military base and say florida and then florida will be like time to go guys and they're going to be like these nukes belong to us we're not leaving them and they're going to be

like yes you are and there's no other way it could go down and what about like area 51 and all the underground tunnels and stuff that probably cross state lines for all i know yeah and what about the underground cities full of reptilian people? Yeah, exactly. Where are they going to go? Who gets those in the custody? And underneath that? I think they choose. They choose? Yeah, they choose.

Well, they're going to... It's kind of a cool thing to do, but... They're going to say that 50 miles below the surface is not controlled by the state. Oh, just like the sky. Yeah. Well, the sky is FAA. How far up? Only 10 miles?

How far down does our jurisdiction go here? That's a good question. Eight miles? Yeah. And you just made that up. The lizard people are going to be like, you don't have mineral rights. Yeah, that's fair. Turn your butt around.

Surface rights only. So I've looked at a lot of land, and all the mineral rights are gone. And for obvious reasons. Companies will buy up mineral rights but not the property so that if they ever want to scan for it or look for something, they own it. If you ever strike or find something, they own it. So it's really annoying when you're trying to buy land. You got to make sure you're buying the mineral rights as well. Which is why a company can come onto your land and start drilling and digging because

they have rights underneath. But the secret is the real reason mineral rights have been bought up is because the lizard people want to make sure nobody visits their turf. That makes sense now. Yeah, that proves it. Yeah, the lizard people. Yeah, checks out. It's proof. It's proof.

It's proof. Low standard of proof there. I don't know about that, Tim. I think he's got a point. Nicholas Graves says, I work for a towing company in Michigan and I tow semi in Metro Detroit. I will refuse to tow any protesters.

Show me your honkers. That's the other thing, too. It's amazing how many of the truckers are just like, we rely on this industry. We're friends with these guys. We're not going to interfere with what they're doing. Yeah, that's the immune system. If your veins are doing – you can't rip your veins out of your body. It's a very, very effective protest. Right.

In terms of the ability to sort of force the other side to really negotiate with you normally. I mean, you just don't have to do that because the protests aren't that powerful. Exactly. Christopher Fisher says, Ian, is the Taliban evil? Well, the Taliban's a group. So an individual can do evil things. But that doesn't mean they're always evil forever. Can I ask that?

Maybe that's an answer. Well, here's a question, though. If the group exists specifically to band people together to do something evil, then is the group itself evil, I think? It's tough because if I put a Taliban sticker on my chest, it doesn't just turn me evil. Not even necessarily the Taliban. Like we're just talking about – I'm curious about your view of groups and evil in general. I don't think groupness makes people evil. If I slapped like a swastika, some insignia red, it doesn't turn me evil.

It doesn't always. I could take it off my chest and I'm still Ian. Well, I would agree it doesn't turn you evil, but don't you think that kind of signifier displays what's going on inside, which could indicate whether you are leaning towards good actions or evil ones? Maybe it's correlative but not causative. Well, yeah. I mean, so like if someone else comes and slaps a swastika on you, that doesn't make you a Nazi.

The patch doesn't cause it. But I think it causes people to know where your loyalties lie when you wear it voluntarily. Maybe not know. It causes them to consider where they lie, but they definitely don't know just because of the way I look or the group I'm affiliated with. All right. No Legs, No Problem TV says, Gen X are the kids of boomers, 1965 to 1979.

Millennials are 80 and on. I'm a millennial. I'm near, I wouldn't say late millennial, but closer to the end of millennial. And my parents are boomers. Yeah. Same for me. Same. I'm X. I'm the last year of X and my parents are boomers.

Ah, yeah. Overlap. So it's a gradient across the board. It's not like there's just one generation, then one generation, but typically leapfrogs. Yeah. The bulk is a leapfrog. My kids would be not millennial. I'd be Gen X with like alpha gen kids or something. Yeah. my kids would be not millennial i'd be gen x with like alpha gen kid kids or

something yeah your kids would be gen alpha i'm gonna call it alpha gen is that it's called generation i'm switching it oh he's changing it yeah that's ian's prerogative all right let's grab some more of these super jets real quick let's see car uh crafty veteran says hey tim have you seen showtime's new documentary series trailer everything's going to be all white because seeing it caused quite the controversy today no i don't know what that's about do you guys want super racist thing it's just like white people are you know bad and white they're doing all sorts of bad things and here's a bunch of people of color talking about systemic racism it's like how. Who makes that and thinks they're doing anything interesting?

So tedious. Ian, let me ask you a question. Are white people evil as a group? Would you at least say that? There are no white people. Would you at least say that white people are evil? No one's white and no one's white. It's not white people that are evil.

It's whiteness that's evil. Let me ask you a question. If a group of people were demanding the right for the government to discriminate on the basis of race, would you oppose that? Yeah. What if they won and started discriminating on the basis of race? Would you be upset with that? Yeah. What would you be willing to do to stop them from violating the rights of people based on their race?

Usually what I do is I make TV shows and yell and convince people to change their minds. I suppose the more difficult question is, Ian, if you saw a guy had taken any racial minority, literally chained them up in their backyard and was forcing them at a whip crack to do hard labor, what would you try and stop that person? Yeah, call 911. What if you're in the middle of nowhere and there's no cell service? Post-apocalypse, Ian. I don't think I would attack the situation. Yeah, call 911. What if you're in the middle of nowhere and there's no cell service? Post-apocalypse, Ian.

Yeah, post-apocalypse. I don't think I would attack the situation. It's too dangerous. You'd let the... I'd know that it was there and I would report it somehow. Let's say you're armed. I don't think I would attack the situation. It's not safe.

That's not a safe situation to attack. What if the guy's a complete, just a total wimp? No guns. He has nothing. He has nothing. By the way, I'm useless. Yeah, you could totally take this guy. No, no no no

let's say you're armed with a gun and you see a man who's enslaved another man would you save the person who's been enslaved

I wouldn't take it I wouldn't attack the slave the slaver not no not today not me in 22

2022 that's the craziest thing to me like would you guys would I attack yeah I like to hope I like to think so if there was if it's it's

you're there's no solid service anywhere and you come across a guy who's enslaved another man let's say it's a racial minority you're armed would you attempt to free the man who's been slaved enslaved and use force if necessary by the way he's not asking for legal advice he's asking for philosophical i mean moral ethical questions uh i mean i don't know i mean i mean it's kind of crazy i think the answer is very very simple yes 100 i would yell to the guy back the f off get away now where's the key to the chains but what if he pulls out a weapon if if someone enslaved another person and like literally and had a weapon on them, I would act in defense of others and use the force necessary to stop that situation. Does he even care that he's a slave?

I mean, is he being attacked? What? Yes, I'd imagine. We're slaves to the system that we live in. Yo, yo, yo. I don't want someone to break me out of it. Would you want someone with a gun to come save you and do that for others? No, no.

Thank you. They've tried. No thanks. I don't need government to save me right now it. Would you want someone with a gun to come save you and do that for others? No, thank you. They've tried. No thanks. I don't need government to save me right now. There are some things that I think are – That big government intervening in slavery relations. Intervening in slavery. Let me simplify it in for you.

If you saw a big, fat, 50-year-old bald guy with a 7-year-old little girl with a chain around her neck and he was dragging her and you were armed would you would you use the force necessary to save that little girl he's dragging her across the ground and hurting her that's a different story what's the difference if i just see a slave like a guy chained up sitting there that's different than seeing a kid get dragged across let's say it's a field you're coming across a field you got no cell service you're armed and you see a big fat nasty looking slobbering guy with a 10-year-old girl in chains crying and screaming. Her wrists are red and he's laughing at her and he's like, I own you. I would take control of the situation with the weapon and if he had a weapon, I'd fire.

If he gave his weapon, I'd fire. All right, there we go. So when it comes to racial minorities, you wouldn't intervene but when it comes to children, you would. Well, if any human, I don't care what race they are. If they're a child and they're being dragged across the ground by someone, I will intervene. But like general slavery, you're fine with? Like if they're –

It's not my position to go destroy someone's slave environment. I would love to. I can't – like what do you want me to do? I'm not advocating the America – John Brown. John Brown. I know John Brown was intense. I have him on my Twitter page.

Well, look, look, look. But I'm not advocating invading China to free the Uyghurs. I think I would love to free the Uyghurs. Ian, here's the thing. I think you're extrapolating what your answer might be to other more complicated situations. Tim's just asking in this specific situation, what would you do? Not necessarily how that applies to China or any other foreign power. I think Ian's issue is that he doesn't want to answer

these moral questions, so instead deflect. But it's also 10.03, but I want to. Let's go. Alright, we'll go to the member segment. If you haven't already, smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, and come listen to our morality debate on whether or not you would use force to free slaves. It's an interesting question.

Now that you say it like that, it actually, I don't know, maybe I'm just hired for my newborn fatigue. But I want to bring this conversation into abortion and the modern era. So go to TimCast.com. We're going to have this conversation. It'll be evergreen.

It'll be good for us. We have a lot of shows about this and religion stuff. So support the channel by being a member. Smash the like button. Subscribe. You can follow the show

at TimCast IRL. You can follow me at TimCast. Follow us on Instagram. Will, you want to shout anything out? Yeah, Internet Accountability Project, theiap.org. Also, just follow me on Twitter at Will Chamberlain. I am Seamus Coghlan. I have a YouTube channel called

Freedom Tunes. We release a new cartoon every Thursday. We have one coming out this week that I think is pretty funny about federal agents. We also released a cartoon today about the Joe Rogan public apology. It actually has Tim guest starring as Dr. Fauci. If you guys want

to check that out, go over to youtube.com slash freedom tunes, hit subscribe, hit the notification bell, and check out the new cartoons as they're released. Thank you. Everyone's typing one in chat. That means I win. Oh no, that means I win. Type a one if you love me.

Oh, too late. Yeah, I want to give a special shout out to Luke Rutkowski, who's in the chat right now. And I got his shirt on right now. This is a We Are Change shirt. Oh, snap. This is awesome. It's so true. It's got all the different dystopian worlds, and in the middle, you're here.

I don't necessarily agree with that, Luke, but I'm wearing your shirt because I love you, and I love the shirt. And you can get these at thebestpoliticalshirts.com follow me at iancrossland.net and I just rolled a 20 by the way Ian you won't even take a stance on the shirt you're wearing I know it's amazing I love it I firmly

agree with the shirt I have to say that I think the world we're living in is a weirder and worse dystopia than any portrayed in any of these books I'm hoping that it's about to get brighter. It's very dark right now. Anyway, you guys may follow me on Twitter and Mines at Sarah Patch Lids. We will see you all at TimCast.com. Thanks for hanging out.

Bye, guys.